[lXwVlTgO]

Time: The Real
Time is both subjective and objective, depending on how each individual perceives it. Objective is the way in which God would view it. A fixed series of events each before, after, or at the same time as another event. The subjective view is the way we percieve it; Time flows, Future to present to past.

Time: The Unreal
Time in this sense as supported by Immanuel Kant says that time is nothing but a jumble of senses, but the mind imposes order and meaning to these meanningless events. Space and Time are both only tools the mind uses to put order in a chaotic world. This way explains the objective view as nothing more than a construction of the mind, an image our minds create of past events.

the idea that god is omnibeing presents that he is everything.

This would make it logical to assume that he is the universe.

Either that, or time as we know it does not exist.

So by looking at time in the sense of the objective view, as Anne Conway put it "God is unchanging, he is outside time" Conway looks at time in the sense that Time is change. If everything in the universe was frozen and absolutely nothing moved, there would be nothing that could distunguish one moment from another; Time would be meaningless. So she concluded Time is change; without change, there is no time.

Conway firmly believed that God exists, thus she argued that if time is change, and God is perfect; He cannot become more perfect, because it would mean he has been less perfect. Thus God who is perfect, cannot change in time. If God is perfect, God cannot change thus God is not time. This is why God can view time as a series of events. Everything else sees and feels time in the subjective view, because they are not perfect and thus can change.

You can have one with the other. Both can be true, depending on your view. Time may exist, it may be created by our minds, it may be manipulated, it may be measured.

Also, what's wrong with flawed logic? Just because we learn 1 lie, doesn't mean all the truths we've ever known have been wrong too.

[Hftqdxpm]

i've come to the same basic conclusion.

the idea that god is omnibeing presents that he is everything.

This would make it logical to assume that he is the universe.

Either that, or time as we know it does not exist. Our entire belief in how time flows and how things happen after something happens, 1 second here, and then 1 second later, is flawed.

That seems kinda eery to me that Human Logic can be flawed. How can we believe anything we deduce if we know that we are wrong? The existence of paradoxes prove that our logic contradicts itself...and how can there be any other logic?

/head hurts.

We cannot prove or disprove whether God is, or is not. I do assume that what one calls God is what I call the universe. Only difference is that God is personified and the universe is a mere object.

Time: The Real
Time is both subjective and objective, depending on how each individual perceives it. Objective is the way in which God would view it. A fixed series of events each before, after, or at the same time as another event. The subjective view is the way we percieve it; Time flows, Future to present to past.

Time: The Unreal
Time in this sense as supported by Immanuel Kant says that time is nothing but a jumble of senses, but the mind imposes order and meaning to these meanningless events. Space and Time are both only tools the mind uses to put order in a chaotic world. This way explains the objective view as nothing more than a construction of the mind, an image our minds create of past events.

Originally Posted by ~Jordan` the idea that god is omnibeing presents that he is everything.

This would make it logical to assume that he is the universe.

Either that, or time as we know it does not exist.

So by looking at time in the sense of the objective view, as Anne Conway put it "God is unchanging, he is outside time" Conway looks at time in the sense that Time is change. If everything in the universe was frozen and absolutely nothing moved, there would be nothing that could distunguish one moment from another; Time would be meaningless. So she concluded Time is change; without change, there is no time.

Conway firmly believed that God exists, thus she argued that if time is change, and God is perfect; He cannot become more perfect, because it would mean he has been less perfect. Thus God who is perfect, cannot change in time. If God is perfect, God cannot change thus God is not time. This is why God can view time as a series of events. Everything else sees and feels time in the subjective view, because they are not perfect and thus can change.

You can have one with the other. Both can be true, depending on your view. Time may exist, it may be created by our minds, it may be manipulated, it may be measured.

Also, what's wrong with flawed logic? Just because we learn 1 lie, doesn't mean all the truths we've ever known have been wrong too. I never looked at it that way. I didn't take the objective view into account. Yes, time can be extremely relative, and is best described that way. There is no opposition to the objective view of time. It is a straightforward argument and perhaps cannot be questioned. However, in order for time to exist, it must have an effect on everything in the universe, otherwise it would be untrue. If God is said to be 'outside' of time, then one (either God or time) has to be untrue.

When logic is flawed, then another more logical solution is expounded. Paradoxes are mostly human made. We convince our own minds to see things that way. They are mostly based around infinite concepts, where we are unable to grasp them literally.

This is a new matter to me, it may take me some time, or shall I say, 'change from here to then', to think about this further.

[TerriLS]

Virtues are determined based on the Views valued by an individual. Values are the views that individual holds.

[bettingonosports]

this thread pwns.

thx for insight.

[panholio]

Atheism is what truly doesn't exist, everyone believes in something they cant prove. Virtue and Morality however exist beyond the scope of faith and religion, left to their own devices man wants to do good, at least for himself and those he cares most for. Then it becomes an issue of the man who steals food for his family, is he good or evil? Or is it the man who jelously guards more food than he and his family can eat the evil one?

[bettingonosports]

it depends on what everyone else things.

Questions of philosophy are left to the majority to decide.

[Hftqdxpm]

One gets whatever he works for. If someone has something, it is their right to claim all ownership to it.

We cannot decide anything. There are too many sides. If one person believes something, then by all means it is their right to believe it. Nobody has any right to tell them not to believe. It is acceptable to believe in something, however, we mustn't force our own beliefs onto another. We have no right to say that we are right and they are wrong. We have no authority when it comes to beliefs, so we must accept that the others believe what they do. Humans shall always co-exist, because they are smart enough to do so. If one chooses to believe there is a God, then their belief shall stand unopposed, likewise for those who do not believe in a God. If one doesn't tolerate another, then it is their problem and their problem only. Surely, humans are intelligent enough to realize that tolerating is the only way to go forward. Intolerance leads to failure, like Hitler, for e.g. Trying to eliminate those who disagree with you will lead to your own elimination eventually.

A single set of virtues and values cannot be determined so simply, therefore they do not exist either. There are too many different views. A certain set of virtues and values are no longer universal, therefore no longer applicable to all the people. They differ among people. One single set of virtues and values cannot be defined as the virtues and values of the world. There are many.

[alecoplesosse]

One's universe as they see it is simply an expression of data gathered and processed by the mind.

But that "blow-your-mind-if-you-think-about-it-too-much" crap outta the way, I believe that the quality of one's life and the satisfaction they get out of it depends on their willpower. You can value or believe in whatever you want, but without the willpower to act on those values and beliefs, they're completely pointless.