Time is an illusion

Time is a form of measurement.

time is an allusion

>X is an illusion

what did they mean by this?

That it's really different than how we perceive it.

Isn't it by necessity? What with the noumenon and all that. If that's the case then it's a fairly vacuous statement.

or am i wrong

But it isn't. It is literally unironically exactly as we perceive it. It is an entity that flows, there is a substantive difference between past, present, and future. And nobody can take that away from me

>X is an illusion
>why?
>because it sounds profound
Philosophy

Basically this. We can stop making philosophy threads now.

Lunchtime doubly so.

well, I guess I can throw away my philosophy degree

...

You know this is common erroneous counterargument against philosophy. Pretty much all philosophers tell in their works that "yeah just ignore the trolls that try to 'solve' problems of philosophy by claiming they don't exist"

You haven't yet?

Just a joke, m8.

dude all of existance is just one electron that's in different places at the same lmao

You're wrong because you're implying the noumenon is a thing in the first place, and if you do then you have to prove it is before making asserting anything related to it (other than the denial of the noumenon itself).

Fixed

If you say, as Julian Barbour does in his great book The End of Time, that "time doesn't exist, it's merely an illusion", you might as well say "I don't exist, I am merely an illusion", as Baudrillard did indeed end up saying ("I am my own simulacrum"), since as Hermann Minkowski pointed out while elaborating Einstein's conception of spacetime, "Nobody has ever noticed a place except at a time, or a time except at a place". By killing time, in other words, you simultaneously kill all "places", including your very own: i.e. your own perspective on things, which you created precisely by creating your very own personal spacetime frame, whose uniqueness implies that 1) It will fundamentally diverge from everyone else's spacetime frames, and 2) When added to all the others will amount to zero because at the level of the universe all these divergencies (which you abstracted by subtracting their relative values from the sum of all of them in the first place) cancel each other out — leading those who believe that a model of the world is the same thing as the world — the scientists, one of whom is Julian Barbour — to conclude that the universe doesn't exist, and therefore nothing inside it either, neither time nor space — or Baudrillard and Julian Barbour.
We are still therefore waiting for someone to write "The End of Julian Barbour", which is to say the book that explains to us that Julian Barbour "doesn't exist", because he is "merely an illusion". The question is whether Julian Barbour himself will agree with that book when he reads it. And that's where John Bell comes in, with his acutely psychological observation that "It is always interesting to find that solipsists, when they have children, have life insurance". Barbour admits that he has it. Did Baudrillard also have any, or did he trust that the simulacra of his wife and children would do just fine without the simulacrum of the simulated policy's simulated money, and save himself the simulacrum of the expense of simulating buying it?

And why can't it be a given that reality exists independent of observation?

Also wrong is not the same as unfounded.

kek

give me one reason to believe the opposite

your face is an illusion.

What are things that are not illusions supposed to be?
Things that have an inherent being?

>can't tell the difference between pseudo-knowledge and real philosophy.
Nice pic, you should get a haircut.

You're right. I just said wrong as a way to begin the question since he asked if he was wrong or not.
I don't disagree with the idea, I'm just saying you have to bring your own argument before assuming the audience agrees with you. If you want people who disagree, try Dennet who thinks consciousness is just your brain pranking you, or that one neuroscientist who thinks we just have an incomplete perception that can be accounted for with science.

>You're right. I just said wrong as a way to begin the question since he asked if he was wrong or not.

That was me and fair enough. That's a whole discussion in and of itself, but still worth bringing up if you're gonna go ''x is an illusion''.

Time most definitely exists so far as the universe really exists but our brains warp it in a way so that we can be functional on a day to day basis, for example when you're dieing time wil go extremely slow in comparison with your daily activities.

And? What are you going to to do about it?

>not liking Faulkner
i'm comforted by the fact that you will go on to achieve nothing in life

Time is not an Illusion, time it's an abstract concept. Our perception of that concept it's an Illusion.

"This world is an illusion, exile!"

The problem is that are lots of impressionable children on this board that end up actually thinking that way

Firsscchht we musch understanshdd... *sniff* that OP, or Orishginal poschterr *adjusts t-shirt* as is known to schome, is infact a homosexual

Calling your opponents "children" sure makes you seem more credible.

That's not what he implied dipshit

We are slaves to what we perceive as time but may be nothing.

WOW! hIgHlY iNtIleCtUaL

Do you... want more?

Time is money

YeS GiVe Me MoRe You R a GeeNiUs
So DeEp LiKe WoAh

Get a grip, you faggot. I cringed so hard I started reverberating

Ergo the love of time is the root of all evil

Money isn't the root of all evil, though
>"For the love of money is the root of all evil."
>For the love of money...

Ergo, you're a pleb

Zizek is like Sam Harris and other idealists or proclaimed socialists.
Not in what they believe.
But that they can seem to understand that most people aren't like them, some people NEED a belief in god, some people need to be ruled, some people are violent, most people are selfish, some people don't want help the world or be a "community", some people are very naive, some are just stupid.

Their world view only works if everyone thought like them.

>Can't

Maybe read that post again and consider that in your rush to be clever you've actually been a bit stupid

>some people NEED a belief in god...
hurr, wtf do you think althusser, lacan and zizek talk about all the time? inherent anthropological need for absolute systems and le big other. the whole point is that it isnt just onesided manipulation and coercion.

How's that you gay faggot

You miss the point.
Idealism is the problem.
Whatever everyone's beliefs are or aren't is irrelevant. The point is you can't change them.
Everyone who thinks the world can be better place through some movement or revolution, or actually think "star trek world" is an achieveable goal.. they are the root of all evil, wars and all bullshit.

>The point is you can't change them
Lmao
>Everyone who thinks the world can be better place through some movement or revolution, or actually think "star trek world" is an achievable goal.. they are the root of all evil, wars and all bullshit
Lmao

He says this unironically while posting on the internet probably from a Chinese made laptop or mobile phone while wearing cotton or polyester clothing and still alive due to advancements in medicine which have allowed his diabetes to not kill him

Missing the point again.
And I'm too suicidal to explain it.

>And I'm too suicidal to explain it.
HAHAHAH fucking pathetic

Multiculturalism is generally bad.
The world need nations (unless you like to force the world to be one big ugly culture)
New groups and ideas will form and split over and over. Same with language. Which causes division.
Humanity is inherently good willing.
Humans like people that are like themselves.
Nihilism and idealism are two sides of the same evil coin.
"Capitalism" is the best system humans have ever created. Doesn't mean it's the best possible system.
Humans need great leaders to cause change, not "big brother", we don't want to have to work for progress (those who do are the ones who cause war and conflict.)
We'd like to point at a hopefully good guy and say "that's right", maybe do a parade/protest, maybe donate some money.
But there are no more leaders.
I wish there actually was a Illuminati.
Majority rule is also pretty bad.

Some of this is maybe obvious to you, but it isn't for the majority of people, and especially not celebrity socialists.

What the fuck are you going on about, you absolute retard?
How old are you? 16?

Most people just don't want no trouble and mind their own business, even if a million people just died other side of the planet they'd still have the same sentiment.
They don't want their lifestyle to change or be challenged.

wut?

>"Capitalism" is the best system humans have ever created
>Majority rule is also pretty bad
Well, we found the authoritarian capitalist...
>hurr durr we needs obedient slaves to make me rich! Everyone who tries to improve things is evil!!

I'm not him but capitalism is great, you're just upset that you're bad at it

Hey, capitalism is a 0-sum game: for every dollar that I make, you lose a buck; for every winner there is a loser - which means, at best, capitalism is only good for no more than 50% of the population - AT BEST.
At worst, capitalism works out for just one guy at the top.....
Yeah, real great system you're shilling....moron. Get a brain before you start yappin' next time.

No it's not.

We can't quantify the flow of time, which is the fundamental aspect of time, therefore the physicists and reductivists say it's an illusion. Einstein, and many others, took the metaphors we use to conceptualize Time to literally.

itt: people who can't into physics try to into physics

physics doesnt explain time, its just a scalar quantity.
it explains spacetime, functions of time, planck time, time arrow of entropy, but never time itself, which is probably a zizekian illusion.

based feyerabend wasn't a postmodernist

Matter is an illusion

t. Hegel

>hasn't read aristotle
>thinks of time in terms of the presence of the present
>thinks time flows from future to past

kys

Linear time is an illusion

>For every winner there is a loser
Congratulations. You just learned a fundamental life lesson.
This is how it's been since the very first bacteria. Since the first cell, whatever. This is how it is and always has been.

You love capitalism when it suits you, though, don't you? How did you even post? Oh, that's right...

You're mad because you're bad. Prove me wrong.

>thinks capitalism reflects reality
>like, at all

Son, someone needs to inform you about the concept of human constructs......
But, hey - if capitalism can ever survive without government controls, you be sure to let me know, mmkay sunshine?

And so is death.

On the contrary, death is all there is

I didn't expect Veeky Forums to catch such a patrician reference, but still I'm disappointed.

>x + y + x + october - yellow = capitalism

thats about what i got from this post.

DER IS NO BIG ODER

>Is bad at capitalism so is mad

That's right. Time and space are one in the same. "time" just a comparison of events that have passed compared to the rate that the earth is rotating, and to the rate which it is revolving around the sun.

Time = comparing one object's movement to another. Time is just an empty variable. All there is, is comparing the changes in events and movement that have taken place, compared to the rotation of the earth and the evolution of the earth. There's movement of objects, events, but no time.

To add to this, Zizek isn't the first person to suggest time doesn't exist. I'm sure there's a dozen or so physicists who have asserted this, going to sleep now so don't have TIME to look them up...

Aristotle says this in Physics.

I get what you're trying to say so I'm going to deliberately not look it up.

It's time to split.

that ish to shay *wipes shirt on brow* *wipes brow on mouth* *tug at shirt* there ish no fundamental *glands excrete* *shifts in place* the law of *desconstructs* *observes ideology* hegel ish very *sniffs immensely* *shirt tug* lacan

Why do you think about this shit so much if your suicidal?

Because he's not suicidal and even if he is, he's a worthless faggot anyway and the world wouldn't miss him

As much as I love the guy, he absolutely was. Or you may say he was one of its fathers. I like to think he saw postmodernism as some sort of a cure to the dogmatic thinking, and did not expect it to become a calamity it is now.

Thanks, future Me!

>Hey, capitalism is a 0-sum game
>for every dollar that I make, you lose a buck
>at best, capitalism is only good for no more than 50% of the population

t. learned about economics from reading youtube comments

Saying it's an illusion doesn't make it not real.

>muh trickle-down economics
Yeah, that don't work, pal.

Works fine for me faggot, you're just upset because you can't get good
Now go get me my coffee, run along

>wanting other people to be unhappy

why?

Misery loves company...most can only be happy relative to another's unhappiness...it's fucked and weird.

>Implying I'm unhappy
I don't want anyone to be unhappy, I just want people to live in reality.
The utopia you dream of is not possible.
Capitalism is allowing us to communicate right now. Without it, not possible.

People are anti-capitalist because they are not very good living in a capitalist world. People want "free" shit, essentially.
Good luck with that.
And yes, misery loves company, hence anti-capitalists want everyone to eat bread and soup and be on their level.

Capitalism will take us to Mars.

Every leftist should be deported to Venezuela, to live according to the results of the policies they desire.

Does anyone disagree with me?

>>muh trickle-down economics

Nice straw man, faggot. Bush called it ''voodoo economics'' and he was a republican. There's room for nuance. The remedy for unbridled capitalism is called regulation, not marxism.