Putting time in perspective

[stu]

rofl, so you lack the most important skill to cope, according to the article.

And without that important skill, communism and faggotry commence.


so funny

I don't dwell much on what folks like you perceive or don't perceive.

 

[fhl]

Stu,

Maybe this is the time to ask you, too, along with dbgarland the question from the article.

Since man can't cope with reality, and needs religion, then is commie faggotry your reality, or is it your attempt to cope with reality?

 

[stu]

There are two sets of time. Our time as individuals and time itself. Time itself is a constant measure that does not change or give any appearance of change. Our time as individuals is relevant. It can be and is manipulated, usually at an unconscious level. We live in spans as long or short as the events around us impact our "state of mind". At the very same time we occupy the time itself space in which there can be no manipulation and no state of mind can change it. The issue with humans being unable to get our minds around just how short a period we have been here is that we have no reference point to measure in our own minds. In short, we have no internal clock for time itself. How long is a million years? I, you, have no idea. How long is a day? While our state of mind may alter by a few minutes, we do have an idea of how long a day is without using a external clock. Our internal clock is sufficient.
Yes, I have an interest in time and enjoy any discussion about it., without the reference to religion or politics.

"If the Earth formed at midnight and the present moment is the next midnight, 24 hours later, modern humans have been around since 11:59:59pm—1 second."

Yes, billions of years difficult, but billions of years represented in terms of 24 hrs?
I wonder how that doesn't help get your mind around how short a period humanity has been on the planet.

 

[CaptainObvious]

"If the Earth formed at midnight and the present moment is the next midnight, 24 hours later, modern humans have been around since 11:59:59pm—1 second."

Yes, billions of years difficult, but billions of years represented in terms of 24 hrs?
I wonder how that doesn't help get your mind around how short a period humanity has been on the planet.

You think you have a reference point. You don't.(not said with any intent towards confrontation)(it really is a pain in the ass communicating not face to face with subjects such as this without all the potential for someone taking something the wrong way) Extremely small time frames are as difficult to relate to as extremely long periods. I'm just saying that it is impossible for a human being to have any idea of just how short a period of time we have been here. We can say, yeah, it's a blink of an eye and we can measure a blink of an eye, but what we can't do is compare the blink to the overall expanse of time. You can't put them side by side and watch.
It is the human ego which will not allow us to comprehend our insignificance in relation to overall time. We can only identify ourselves in our time, which is significant to us as individuals.

 

[dbphoenix]

It is the human ego which will not allow us to comprehend our insignificance in relation to overall time.

True, as far as it goes. But once one has set aside ego, comprehending our insignificance is no problem at all.

 

[stu]

You can't put them side by side and watch.

I appreciate what you are saying and there's a lot to it, but (you just knew that a but was coming...) I think db is essentially correct.

In terms of time, once you get rid of ego, you can start to comprehend human insignificance.
And as db says (although I know you are not including the subject) hence religion.

 

[CaptainObvious]

I appreciate what you are saying and there's a lot to it, but (you just knew that a but was coming...) I think db is essentially correct.

In terms of time, once you get rid of ego, you can start to comprehend human insignificance.
And as db says (although I know you are not including the subject) hence religion.

I'm not sure the ego can be completely set aside. Yes, it can be leveled out to a point of some humility, but smashed completely? Not in my experience and I'm not just talking about myself. I know many people who are actively trying to tackle this issue, as am I, and have been for years. This is not to say that my limited experience is the be all and end of of it, but the longer I'm at it, the more I can see the magnitude of the job. I do agree that in the overall scheme of things we are wholly insignificant. It's just keeping that thought day by day without losing ones own relevance to the here and now which is difficult.

 

[Tsing Tao]

I do not believe the ego can never truly be set aside.

 

[dbphoenix]

I'm not sure the ego can be completely set aside. Yes, it can be leveled out to a point of some humility, but smashed completely? Not in my experience and I'm not just talking about myself. I know many people who are actively trying to tackle this issue, as am I, and have been for years. This is not to say that my limited experience is the be all and end of of it, but the longer I'm at it, the more I can see the magnitude of the job. I do agree that in the overall scheme of things we are wholly insignificant. It's just keeping that thought day by day without losing ones own relevance to the here and now which is difficult.

Being "relevant" and being "significant" are not the same thing. Once one has accepted one's insignificance, he needn't resort to nihilism. There are many ways of becoming relevant without the imposition of ego.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Being "relevant" and being "significant" are not the same thing. Once one has accepted one's insignificance, he needn't resort to nihilism. There are many ways of becoming relevant without the imposition of ego.

They are not the same thing, but they are connected, and it is my experience that one cannot pursue relevance without some eventuality of ego coming into play. Again, that's just my experience. The ego must continually be kept in check. it's not a one and done type situation.