Momentary question

[Bernard]

If the past doesn't actually exist, what are memories? Internal experiences?

Perhaps the past does still exist...as matter in a rearranged form.

But then it wouldn't be the past...

[chaz wyman]

How does 'now' not make sense, but a poor memory or the imagined future is somehow more sensible?

Because "now" has no duration and thus in itself no context to make sense within. Nothing happens "now", because even the fastest of events take at least some time. When people talk about living "in the now", they mean focusing on the present, neither thinking too far ahead nor lingering on the past. They don't mean actually living in the moment, outside the context of previous and following events.

An example: You are playing tennis "now". How long is this "now"? The whole match? That would be a "now" measured in hours. This set? This game? This ball? Even as you return a serve, you are at the very least aware of where the ball is coming from (the recent past) and where you want it to go (the immediate future). But that is not all; each ball you strike only makes sense within the rules of the game, which are set in the past and presently active in memory, just like the meaning of each ball changes depending on whether you are on your way to win the match or lose it (how you are anticipating the future).

I do not agree that you have to mediate to find the now. THe now is what you have, like it or not.

The now finds you all the time; you are being had by the now at every moment.

For you to find the now, you need to free yourself from the context of past and future, which is what you have, like it or not.

I get what you are saying but still I can't agree.

[Bernard]

An argument I would give about the non existence of the past is that what is here right now is infinite and infinity can't be added to by an entityt such as the past. Why can't infinity be added to? There is no point at which one could connect anything else to it. there is no tail or head, no inside or outside ot outside of infinity.

[chaz wyman]

An argument I would give about the non existence of the past is that what is here right now is infinite and infinity can't be added to by an entityt such as the past. Why can't infinity be added to? There is no point at which one could connect anything else to it. there is no tail or head, no inside or outside ot outside of infinity.

Infinity is by definition a thing beyond your experience. As we cannot experience infinity we cannot demand that this is the case for the universe to be infinite.
There is every reason to assert that infinity is a logical impossibility as you seem to imply. But you imply it without concluding the obvious.
What happens when you cut infinity in half; add one to it; or double it?

[Bernard]

No, infinity is not beyond my experience. It IS my experience. This not a rational statement but who cares about that! In the end rationality is another way of kidding ourselves.

[reasonvemotion]

I think we have what we choose to remember of the past and we have the present.

The future is flimsy and insubstantial. The future is one's ego.

[Bernard]

Go REV!

[reasonvemotion]

You tell me

[Bernard]

I don't know.../ do we choose, or is it like breathing and have to remember? In which case are we talking about a function rather than an arena of experiences that no longer occur? Me in the womb, me in the seconds before my death and me typing... these are just varieties of me, any one of which I can access right now! The future and past are inaccessible only in according to the amount to which we require them. Simon Weil's thoughts on 'necessity' is my contemplation here. Necessity not only rules us according to our requirements, it also hosts us according to our awareness of life's mysteries.

[Bernard]

Was somehow thinking of lennon's Instant Karma whilst tapping in the above - and damn if it wasn't the next song on the radio!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=AU&hl=e ... qP3wT5lpa4

[reasonvemotion]

An argument I would give about the non existence of the past is that what is here right now is infinite and infinity can't be added to by an entityt such as the past. Why can't infinity be added to? There is no point at which one could connect anything else to it. there is no tail or head, no inside or outside ot outside of infinity.

One cannot discount the past as this is part of one's internal true self, which is unique to each one of us. If we think the past is of no consequence then we will lose touch with a most important part of one's self and the ability to tap into who we really are. Our dreams and fantasies hold important clues too and if we deny the importance of how we become who we are, we become sick. Sick in the mind and sick in the body.

[Bernard]

Oh no you don't discount, quite the opposite; by better understanding it for what it is it becomes more functional, eg:n I recall times in the past that were of great happiness and health and a sense of nostalgia and longing for those times grip me, but I don't lose my grip on myself because those experiences belong to me now.

[reasonvemotion]

Bernard,

That was poignantly expressed. You seem to be able to capture moments vividly.

[Bernard]

You mean you think I haven't gone down the Nijinsky route quite yet?

http://coilhouse.net/2007/09/vaslav-nijinskys-diaries/

[Notvacka]

I get what you are saying but still I can't agree.

Great. I'm not looking for agreement, only understanding. And I get your point too.

My aim here, as in many other threads, is to show how little of our experienced existence actually takes place in reality. We live most of our lives in our imagination.