I’d counter that it’s our perception that states the future is real or rather our imagination that reads the past and flips it over into an imagined future.

I’d counter that it’s our perception that states the future is real or rather our imagination that reads the past and flips it over into an imagined future.

==

 

That is, we see an “oscillation” and imagine it will continue that way indefinitely without end.
====
 Good question.
Right now I’m attempting to map what “seems right” to me to Wikipedia categories and articles as it’s a common pegboard to stick to.
Then maybe I’ll be able to say to someone who is a logician or philosophy, “why yes, I am of the neo Meinongian stance because of my thoughts on properties but I’m not necessarily married to the notion of non-existent objects: just as a convenience for reasoning with” and sort of know what I’m saying.
Alternate ways to express myself to different audiences I suppose. or “who would I be if I was a philosopher?”
===
 Yeah – that’s how it works I think.
So even we want to say that a unicorn doesn’t exist, we can still say a unicorn has a white coat, draw it in a cartoon, give it a voice and such .
===
But isn’t prediction (and getting better at it) simply a matter of learning oscillations? That is, patterns. Behavior patterns or physical patterns or repeated habits or tendencies, like learning how to play a musical score?
The future is only the future because one is attempting to follow an existing musical score or write new music based upon existing algorithms carrying forward.
But none of that has bearing on whether or not time will be there when or how we anticipate it to be
—-
It gives room for all the fairy tales to live happily ever after as long as we wish.

===

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


7 − four =

Leave a Reply