RE: Presentism and Infinite Chain of Past Events
December 11, 2017 at 11:44 am
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2017 at 12:03 pm by GrandizerII.)
(December 11, 2017 at 11:21 am)wallym Wrote:(December 11, 2017 at 10:30 am)Grandizer Wrote: I don't have to do mathematics or physics. I am mainly doing some logic and philosophy, which almost any human being is capable of doing with enough interest and motivation.
I only bring up the science when others force me to bring up the science, and I never speak with authority on these matters. I let scientists do the talking.
I never said I know what caused the origin of the universe, if it did have an origin. You're strawmanning me here.
No, asshole, I did not just simply watch YouTube videos. I've read articles and book chapters on the philosophy of time as well. Go do your sociopath character undermining speech elsewhere, dickhead.
I didn't realize you read book chapters. I take it all back. Keep applying logic and intuition without the math and science to counter-intuitive concepts rooted in math in science. If there ever was a recipe for success, that's probably it.
What concepts "rooted in math in science"? Metaphysics can be studied without advanced knowledge in mathematics or knowing rocket science. In some cases, you can reach logical conclusions without the need to do any advanced experimental science.
(December 11, 2017 at 11:33 am)Hammy Wrote:(December 11, 2017 at 10:30 am)Grandizer Wrote: My bad. Ok, how did we reach the present from no beginning, according to presentism?
Because existence is eternal . . . as in, it had no beginning or end.
I know you believe that. But what I'm asking you is how did we reach the current present if there was no starting point to time from which we can metaphorically trace a line from it to the present moment?
An analogous question: Is it possible to count from negative infinity to any integer (integer by integer, as in: -infinity, ..., -4, -3, -2, -1, ...), provided you have always existed eternally? It seems like by saying that it is possible, then we are treating it as a number as opposed to a concept.