[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Physical vs. Metaphysical
- To: Patrick G Konshak
- Subject: Physical vs. Metaphysical
- From: Robert L. Vaessen
- Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 09:48:07 -0700
- Cc: Robert Garrity ,
- In-reply-to: <20020319.134006.-3833535.1.>
A very interesting email. Were you actually on a train? Did you
actually speak to someone named George? Or was this purely a
Let's talk about my theory for a few minutes.
My theory. Well, it's not really my theory mind you, I'm just
calling it that because I'm the one trying to explain it. The
ideas that I'm trying to explain have been proposed and
discussed throughout the ages by various heretics.
As a matter of fact, the other day I was reading in my
'Dictionary of the History of Ideas' (Studies of selected
pivotal ideas: Published by Charles Scribner's Sons, New York,
copyright 1974), when I came across the entry 'Time' (Volume IV
pg's 389-406). I haven't read the whole entry yet, but folks
have been talking about the non-existence of time and motion
since way back. I was particularly enamored by the writings
regarding Zeno's four arguments against the reality of time
(and, implicitly, against the reality of time). Zeno
(http://www.shu.edu/projects/reals/history/zeno.html) was a
Greek philosopher who lived around 490BC or so. There are many
other people and theories associated with the non-existence of
time. Another school of thought is of particular interest.
Eleatism, the metaphysics of timeless Being in its most radical
Once I finish this 6 week Leadership course, I hope to delve
deeper into the Metaphysics of my No-time studies. I've got
lot's of references and books lined up. It's become an area of
intense interest for me, and I'm really looking forward to it.
As you mentioned, I've redefined 'Time' and 'Motion'. I agree,
but at the same time the definition's I've provided move time
and motion from the realm of the physical, to the realm of the
metaphysical. They no longer exist as actual measurable,
quantifiable objects/effects. They are now concepts,
perceptions, a point of view. My insistence that they do not
exist, is limited to the physical aspect. I believe they exist
solely as a concept, a metaphysical construct, used to explain
our limited view of the matrix. You said earlier that you
believed in time as a 'concept'. Do you in fact reject the
physical existence of time and motion? Am I arguing the
non-existence (in a physical sense) of time and motion to
someone who agrees that they don't exist in a physical sense?
I guess I would have to agree with the idea that there is in
fact only one node. The Matrix. The nodes that I'm describing
are parts of the matrix which we experience. They are discreet
events/nodes perceived by our consciousness. It made sense to
describe things in this manner, because it helps to separate
things into discrete identifiable components. It's much more
difficult to discuss these ideas when we start from a framework
where the nodes are all mixed together into a single node, an
all encompassing matrix of instantaneous, overlapping,
I've always described the trees and branches as being
consciousness driven experiential streams.
On Tuesday, March 19, 2002, at 02:40 , Patrick G Konshak wrote:
From: Patrick G Konshak
Date: Tue Mar 19, 2002 02:40:06 US/Mountain
Subject: George has left the train.
I have been running an experiment (I like experimenting) with Robert's
idle. I pretend that it was my idle and tried to figure out how I
thought of it, and try to explain it to someone else. So what
I did was
to get on a train. I sat next to a guy name George. I tried to explain
to him that we are not moving forward. I told him we are not moving at
all. The world outside was moving backwards. Then I told him that
because we are not moving that means there is no such thing as motion.
George had many questions and commits along the way about this
then we came to George's stop and he had to leave and go to
work. But he
left my with his concussion. George said that "a node don't experience
motion or time, our consciousness experiences them. Sound to
me that you
didn't show that motion and time don't exist, you just
redefined them. I
can undestand this. I could even come up with the math for
All I have to do is redefine the math use for time and
motion." He also
said "In the matrix there is no 'nodes' only 'node'. 'Nodes'
exit in the
conscious. The same goes for branches and trees."