Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap
What da f**k does "The Past precedes the Present and Future ONLY CHRONOLOGICALLY -- but not logically"mean?
Logically and chronologically, before always precedes after. Always!.
COMMON DEFINITIONS ARE NOT A MATTER OF CHOICE Or fancy
Question? Do we speak the same language?
Remember not all of us speak Boxcarian
|
Well, then look up the common definitions of "chronological" and "logical". But thank you for finally admitting that this is your fundamental problem. I've been saying this for years now -- that you fail to understand there is paradox with Time -- that Time can be and is commonly understood in chronological terms but it should also be understood in logical terms. Logically, it's not possible for the Future to flow FROM the Past because if it did, we would have full knowledge of all Future events.
Moreover, you would logically have Time terminating in the Present, since the flow would be From the Past through the Future to the Present. But, LOGICALLY, if time terminated in the Present, then you would cease to exist the moment you read this,
since there would be nothing beyond the Present. (What can be beyond Time's termination point?) But we escape this absurdity by postulating the real flow of time as logically flowing from the Future through the Present to the Past. The Future is the reservoir of all Time and the Past is its basin. The Present? It could be said that it's the canal that moment by moment connects the two.
