The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Talk about things that are not necessarily related to music or the guitar.
Mr Kite
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:04 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby Mr Kite » Tue Mar 14, 2017 10:19 am

PeteJ wrote:For paradigm examples I'd cite Middle Way Buddhism

If this is a reference to the philosophy of Nagarjuna I do not think he is in your camp. It only seems that way when you come to him via Garfield, or that Indian academic who wrote a book comparing him to Kant (his name escapes me but it was in the 50s I think).

User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2034
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby Andrew Fryer » Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:13 pm

Thanks. I found it last night.
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

PeteJ
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby PeteJ » Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:31 pm

Mr Kite wrote:
PeteJ wrote:For paradigm examples I'd cite Middle Way Buddhism

If this is a reference to the philosophy of Nagarjuna I do not think he is in your camp. It only seems that way when you come to him via Garfield, or that Indian academic who wrote a book comparing him to Kant (his name escapes me but it was in the 50s I think).


I feel that Garfield does him an injustice and confuses the issues. Nagarjuna is definitely in my camp. So is Kant. Or I'm in theirs. I just submitted an article to a Phil. journal comparing the two of them. Kant cannot go where Nagarjuna goes but he reaches the end of logic in just the same way and arrives at the same conclusion.

I would not trust Jay Garfield or Mark Siderits when it comes to Nagarjuna. I feel they do him a disservice. The issues are not as complex as these academics suggest and are actually quite simple.

PeteJ
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby PeteJ » Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:37 pm

Mr Kite wrote:PeteJ, have you discussed this on another forum? If the discussion here was deleted, presumably because it was perceived as religious, it seems wrong to bring the topic back up here - but I for one would be interested in discussing it somewhere.


It's difficult to know what should be discussed here. I suspect I should be keeping my head down but I'll explore the boundaries a bit first. I'm always happy to chat about these topics, here or elsewhere.

Mr Kite
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:04 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby Mr Kite » Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:45 pm

I'm just looking forward to your response to the posts in the other thread relying on the cogito...

Mr Kite
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:04 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby Mr Kite » Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:54 pm

PeteJ wrote:I'm always happy to chat about these topics, here or elsewhere.

So if we take it from the point where all observable phenomena are understood to be interdependent and therefore devoid of intrinsic existence, it seems there are two choices - either we say that since nothing exists ultimately, there is no such thing as ultimate existence and conventional truth is all the truth there is, or we go on believing that there must be such a thing as ultimate existence, and argue that it cannot be brought under our concepts and that that is why it is not found on analysis. Maybe you would want to finesse one or both of those options, but it seems to me that there is a choice along those basic lines. I want to be clear that the first option is not supposed to be nihilistic, and that conventional existence is not being equated with non-existence. It is just the view that there is no truth of the matter that is independent of our interests and concerns. The attraction of the second option seems to lie in the intutition that if there are appearances, i.e. conventional phenomena, they must be grounded in some ultimate reality. I acknowledge that that is intuitively persuasive, but it does not seem to follow from any of the arguments in MMK - so what are the positive arguments in favour of it?

PeteJ
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby PeteJ » Wed Mar 15, 2017 1:03 pm

Mr Kite wrote:
PeteJ wrote:I'm always happy to chat about these topics, here or elsewhere.

So if we take it from the point where all observable phenomena are understood to be interdependent and therefore devoid of intrinsic existence, it seems there are two choices - either we say that since nothing exists ultimately, there is no such thing as ultimate existence and conventional truth is all the truth there is, or we go on believing that there must be such a thing as ultimate existence, and argue that it cannot be brought under our concepts and that that is why it is not found on analysis. Maybe you would want to finesse one or both of those options, but it seems to me that there is a choice along those basic lines. I want to be clear that the first option is not supposed to be nihilistic, and that conventional existence is not being equated with non-existence. It is just the view that there is no truth of the matter that is independent of our interests and concerns. The attraction of the second option seems to lie in the intutition that if there are appearances, i.e. conventional phenomena, they must be grounded in some ultimate reality. I acknowledge that that is intuitively persuasive, but it does not seem to follow from any of the arguments in MMK - so what are the positive arguments in favour of it?


What a brilliant question. Thus is really getting down the nitty-gritty.

The crucial issue here would be the meaning of 'existence'. You are assuming it has a clear meaning, but are you sure? Have you tried to define this word?

I'll try to answer the questions.

There would be no such thing as ultimate existence but there would be ultimate truth. The final truth would outrun our ability to imagine or conceptualise (for reasons explained by Kant) but it would be knowable, and it can be justified and partially explained in metaphysics, and it would solve all metaphysical problems and answer all its questions.

The dilemma you outline is not really a dilemma but an artefact of language difficulties and habitual concepts. Very roughly, all relative phenomena would reduce to one ultimate phenomenon but this cannot be said to exist or not-exist because it would be Unity, thus beyond such partial judgements and distinctions. Hence Heraclitus 'We exist and exist-not'. This is not a contradiction but an explanation that existence is not quite what we usually imagine it to be. In the end there would be no such thing as 'we'.

I cannot properly explain this in a short forum post. I wish I could. But maybe this suggest that there are answers to the questions. I believe that a study of Kant's noumenon and the way he arrives at it would be valuable in shedding light on some of this, albeit his idea fails without some tweaking.

The basic point may be that mysticism would be blatantly absurd if there were no such thing as knowledge of the Ultimate or certain knowledge. Clearly Nihilism is a non-starter. The Perennial view would be that all consciousness is one at a profound level. This is sometimes expressed as 'God is consciousness'. This would not be the God of the priests, obviously. Those who explore consciousness say that it outreaches the distinction between existence and non-existence, such that we need words like 'unmanifest' and 'transcendent'.

Sorry, this is waffle. Your questions deserve better but it's time for lunch.

robinfw
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:10 pm
Location: Bangkok, Thailand

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby robinfw » Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:02 am

Duh
It's just common sense.
No need to get into the esoteric.
Motion needs space.
Time needs motion.
I know. Then we get into the definitions.
Blah blah blah.
LOL

PeteJ
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby PeteJ » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:48 pm

Your point being...

User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2034
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby Andrew Fryer » Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:05 pm

:bye:
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

Jeffrey Armbruster
Posts: 1123
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 3:16 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby Jeffrey Armbruster » Thu Mar 16, 2017 9:11 pm

all this 'ultimate truth' and ultimate reality'...all this big language makes me think you need to bring in ontology; Being as ground, etc. How have Heidegger and Hegel not come into this? Or Nietzsche with his perspectivism, for that matter. Or Aquinas.
Paul Weaver spruce 2014
Takamine C132S

tyke
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 8:51 am
Location: Ynys Mon, Wales, UK

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby tyke » Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:57 am

or Loop Quantum Gravity.

PeteJ
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: The Disappearance of Time and Motion

Postby PeteJ » Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:14 pm

Jeffrey Armbruster wrote:all this 'ultimate truth' and ultimate reality'...all this big language makes me think you need to bring in ontology; Being as ground, etc. How have Heidegger and Hegel not come into this? Or Nietzsche with his perspectivism, for that matter. Or Aquinas.


Quite right. Ontology is the topic and all these writers are immediately relevant. Roughly-speaking I'm endorsing Heidegger and Hegel, but I don't know Aquinas well.


Return to “The Café”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], gitgeezer, Jeffrey Armbruster, Laudiesdad69 and 9 guests