Is the concept of time a metaphysical construct or is it real? In Metaphysics the thought provoking and irritating questions of life are always raised. What is the meaning of life? What is being? What is the purpose of human existence? And the preponderance of Metaphysics is the question; does God exist? Even though these questions are just as important they all coincide with the existence of time. Time connects to the thought provoking questions of life. If you believe in God time can be described as two different momentums. There is the human invented time which we believe to be linear and comes to an end, and then there is God 's time which is thought to be infinite. God 's Time isn 't thought to be linear it can go from the 18 th century
…show more content…
Space and time seem to b e set apart from different aspects of the universe because we can 't see them nor can we touch them. No matter what they cannot be altered with any interaction. However, if they are ongoing and never changing many people believe that they couldn 't be real because God is thought to be ongoing and never changing. A majority of people believe that space and time are dependent on one substance, God. This notion would mean that God belongs to both space and time, and this idea was unheard of by 17 th-century minds. Nevertheless, what are the Origin of Time and its relationship with the human mind? Is time dependent on the mind in order to exist? In Kant 's argument, he separates the existence of time from the world. He believes that time is a priori and in a sense we have to have the instinct to be able to interpret space in order for us to make relationships between what we experience and see in the world, but in his theory space in not considered a part of the world it is just an intuition that we have in order to make sense of our reality. Moreover, Time isn 't a tangible substance we can 't see it, smell it, or touch it. We cannot make sense of time through empirical …show more content…
He rejected the view that time can be classified as change or motion. His first reason was that if you were to look at time as change or movement, it wouldn 't be possible because change and movement happen to something specific, while time occurs everywhere. The second argument Aristotle stated is when the change occurs it can go slower or faster, but you can 't change the speed of time it moves at a constant rate. However even though he states that you can’t use change and motion to classify time, he believes that time has a relationship with movement. This makes sense because when time passes it exemplifies that a movement has occurred. Aristotle also thinks that "before" and "after are words we should use to show that time has passed. Nevertheless, when you look at the terms of the time you also have the now which acts as the boundaries of time, but it can be described as the connection of the past and the future. For Aristotle, the "now" is a geometrical point in a circle that can begin and end at the same time. Time is the measure of motion and Aristotle assigns a number to calculate the motion. Through this, he realized that time has a path and things go from new to old
Space and time seem to b e set apart from different aspects of the universe because we can 't see them nor can we touch them. No matter what they cannot be altered with any interaction. However, if they are ongoing and never changing many people believe that they couldn 't be real because God is thought to be ongoing and never changing. A majority of people believe that space and time are dependent on one substance, God. This notion would mean that God belongs to both space and time, and this idea was unheard of by 17 th-century minds. Nevertheless, what are the Origin of Time and its relationship with the human mind? Is time dependent on the mind in order to exist? In Kant 's argument, he separates the existence of time from the world. He believes that time is a priori and in a sense we have to have the instinct to be able to interpret space in order for us to make relationships between what we experience and see in the world, but in his theory space in not considered a part of the world it is just an intuition that we have in order to make sense of our reality. Moreover, Time isn 't a tangible substance we can 't see it, smell it, or touch it. We cannot make sense of time through empirical …show more content…
He rejected the view that time can be classified as change or motion. His first reason was that if you were to look at time as change or movement, it wouldn 't be possible because change and movement happen to something specific, while time occurs everywhere. The second argument Aristotle stated is when the change occurs it can go slower or faster, but you can 't change the speed of time it moves at a constant rate. However even though he states that you can’t use change and motion to classify time, he believes that time has a relationship with movement. This makes sense because when time passes it exemplifies that a movement has occurred. Aristotle also thinks that "before" and "after are words we should use to show that time has passed. Nevertheless, when you look at the terms of the time you also have the now which acts as the boundaries of time, but it can be described as the connection of the past and the future. For Aristotle, the "now" is a geometrical point in a circle that can begin and end at the same time. Time is the measure of motion and Aristotle assigns a number to calculate the motion. Through this, he realized that time has a path and things go from new to old