What in the NOW is happening!

March 16, 2006 8:34 AM

do you have the time to listen to me whine about nothing and everything all at once?

(1) no starting point? venture with me:
(2) self-evidence insists an idea: SOMETHING IS HAPPENING
(3) further: SOMETHING, IS, and HAPPENING each requires (or can be simplified to) CHANGE
(4) thus, disregard SOMETHING IS HAPPENING and let us accept only the existence of CHANGING and let's refer to it as NOW

(5) to deny NOW: a MIND must attempt to imagine a CONSTANT
(6) within such CONSTANT-ness, NOTHING (or EVERYTHING) happens (not SPACE or MIND or ANYTHING)
(7) thus, to believe CONSTANT-ness, a MIND must dissolve itself and become NOTHING

(8) in accepting NOW, a MIND must REALIZE that NOW must itself be CHANGING (must be NOW) in order to avoid a CONSTANT (NOW-less) END
(9) thus, considering that NOW must be NOW in order for NOW, it is clear that:

(10) NOW cannot exist (implying a CONSTANT NOTHING)

(11) and! / or

(12) NOW is EVERYTHING! (implying a CONSTANT EVERYTHING)

posted by foraneagle2 to Religion & Philosophy (35 answers total)

No.
posted by chrismear at 8:35 AM on March 16, 2006

This is what they're teacing at Wharton these days? I weep for American business.
posted by felix betachat at 8:36 AM on March 16, 2006

Not everybody graduates.
posted by deadfather at 8:38 AM on March 16, 2006

Am I stoned?
posted by nathancaswell at 8:41 AM on March 16, 2006

When you come down, try this one.
posted by felix betachat at 8:42 AM on March 16, 2006

I think 7 may be a bit of a leap, yes?
posted by y6y6y6 at 8:44 AM on March 16, 2006

by the power of greyskull, i have flagged you!
posted by poppo at 8:44 AM on March 16, 2006

You're right - something IS happening. This post is being deleted.
posted by Lotto at 8:46 AM on March 16, 2006

Oh god.
posted by deadfather at 8:46 AM on March 16, 2006

I don't have the time to listen to you whine, but ironically I do have time to comment on this fact.

A paradox ?
posted by slimepuppy at 8:46 AM on March 16, 2006

…
posted by prostyle at 8:48 AM on March 16, 2006

Next time you get this high, make sure you have someone reasonably sober to watch over you and keep you relatively safe.
posted by majick at 8:48 AM on March 16, 2006

[i]I think 7 may be a bit of a leap, yes?
posted by y6y6y6 at 11:44 AM EST on March 16 [/i]

a mind inherently separates
posted by foraneagle2 at 8:48 AM on March 16, 2006

Looks like the blotters are back in town.
posted by Gyan at 8:49 AM on March 16, 2006

Not to sound too harsh, but I suspect that if you took the time to clearly articulate each step in your reasoning, you would start to answer your own questions (whatever they are, exactly). I don't pretend to follow your whole line of reasoning, because I don't think you've made your arguments accessible to us. For instance, there's an awful lot of hand-waving in #3. They do have philosophy courses at Wharton, don't they?
posted by bricoleur at 8:49 AM on March 16, 2006

Yeah I followed you ok until 7, then it was all crazy talk.
posted by ernie at 8:49 AM on March 16, 2006

This is the best AxMe evar.
posted by amro at 8:49 AM on March 16, 2006

Coke & LSD & Ask.Mefi = fun for everybody!
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 8:50 AM on March 16, 2006

The constant-ness of now is not based on its consistency (contantness) but on its referential framework.

Simplified: regardless of what time it is, the time is always NOW. In point of fact, although now is always "now time", the time is never the same twice, given the julian calendar.
posted by ewkpates at 8:50 AM on March 16, 2006

Have you checked out the Time Cube yet? I'm pretty sure the answers you need are there.
posted by Pollomacho at 8:51 AM on March 16, 2006

I would be honored if you would mark me as best answer.
posted by bondcliff at 8:52 AM on March 16, 2006

rm is forever, and all the cars are real, man. (I'm of the understanding that it's best to stay away from computers when you're in a certain condition.)
posted by ubersturm at 8:52 AM on March 16, 2006

Why do I feel like Time Cube is going to become the next Godwin? Like, the schadenfreude one feels in watching a nut rave reaches it's end when somebody makes a "You are educated stupid" reference.
posted by felix betachat at 8:53 AM on March 16, 2006

Take quantum physics, and then you'll realize there's no such thing as a universal NOW. It blew my mind.
posted by knave at 8:53 AM on March 16, 2006

"Congratulations, and welcome to the Doc Bronner's Peppermint Soap Team! Here's your desk. We're so thrilled to have a new copywriter aboard."
posted by Miko at 8:54 AM on March 16, 2006

This will really BLOW YOUR MIND.
posted by nathancaswell at 8:55 AM on March 16, 2006

Everything anyone ever needs to know is in John Ruskin's Fors Clavigera.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:55 AM on March 16, 2006

Miko, marry me?
posted by nathancaswell at 8:55 AM on March 16, 2006

I, for one, am grateful.
posted by grateful at 8:55 AM on March 16, 2006

There is no spoon.
posted by NotMyselfRightNow at 8:56 AM on March 16, 2006

Man, Miko, great minds.
posted by saladin at 8:56 AM on March 16, 2006

Can you imagine being cornered by this lunatic at a party? Ye gods.
posted by unSane at 8:57 AM on March 16, 2006

oh, so the answer is no we don't have to listen to you whine about nothing (because you can't, because to whine about something, even nothing, is to whine about something, not nothing) and yes we do have to listen to you whine about everything (actually I'm just speculating here because you could stop whining at some point in the future, but I'd enjoy it [and speculation about it] more if you didn't) and no we don't have to listen to it all at once (because of time, space, and the assumed continuity of your consciousness, you can't whine "all at once").
posted by ewkpates at 8:57 AM on March 16, 2006

on rep-view: no he's not. his name is. but it isn't referential, its symbollic.
posted by ewkpates at 8:59 AM on March 16, 2006

Needs more orgone.

DOR -> Intervention of magical sylphs -> POR!
posted by robocop is bleeding at 9:01 AM on March 16, 2006