You're travelling on a train with several carriages, you're in the middle. You look out the window, from a certain angle you can see the carriages behind you as they curve round the track. You look the other way and can see the engine. Could you say that you are looking back at the past / looking at the future? If you ran down the carrriage or up the other end would it be travelling in time or are you always in the present?
2006-07-30 06:50:06 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Not quite the same as walking niccyford :)
2006-07-30 07:03:51 · update #1
and yes it was during a very boring journey!
2006-07-30 07:05:49 · update #2
Some of your replies are very thought provoking, it got me thinking about how language can pose some interesting dilemas with interpretations of the same problem. Some languages have three past present and future terms others less or more. So could it be a question of semantics to something that just 'is'. For example, the train trip and the time problem, could we describe tht travelling time as perfect tense past (e.g.I had travelled), perfect tense present (I have travelled ..) and perfect tense future (I will have travelled again...) at the various stages in the carriage? Hope this isnt too confusing, it's confusing to me as I write! But you all got me thinking more! ouch! lol
2006-08-05 03:19:57 · update #3
I should have added also there's the imperfect tense, i.g. I was travelling fast...
By now you probably know what I'm driving at.
2006-08-05 03:48:28 · update #4
You are always in the present, when you look backwards or forward what you see is pretty much in the same time zone as you so therefore it's also in your present.
2006-07-30 06:53:33 · answer #1 · answered by nkellingley@btinternet.com 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Time does not exist and is a concept used to control lives. you can never reach the future because if you do i becomes the present . when you move forward on the train toward the front then the future you perceived from the middle of the train has now become your present. the present you were in has now slipped into your past.
simplified
the future does not exist only the belief that there is a future
the past does not exist only the memory of a previous present.
and the present immediately becomes the past and therefore is only a memory
conclusion:
time does not exist
2006-08-03 08:40:06 · answer #2 · answered by martyn d 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great stuff ..its more poetic than philosophical!
What you say would be correct if 'time' stayed constant while you run up and down the train ..and actually move into your past and future! - But then you would change that to be your present as you are present there.
At any given point of time the position of the first carriage is the future position of the consecutive or the last carriage. Likewise they are at the past position of the carriage in front.
:)
2006-07-30 14:30:22 · answer #3 · answered by sans 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you could say the same when walking, when you look back, youre not looking back at the past, you're just looking back at where you have been. you cant see yourself back there. when you look forward, youre looking where youre going to be, its not the future as such, you may never get there, but its where you're heading, which is what present times all about. train is the same concept, just faster motions. without the place you've just been, and the place you're heading, the present wouldnt exist.
why would ya think about this anyway? lol, boring train journey?
2006-07-30 13:56:08 · answer #4 · answered by niccyford 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No not really because have the idea of the track being a timeline, but the major problem is that they are acually to different parts of the same object traveling through space.
2006-08-05 12:59:28 · answer #5 · answered by quamig 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is an interesting thought, but which ever way you look that is still the present for you. The present for you is not dependent on the way you are looking.
However, for someone in the rear carriage, the present for them is where their carriage is at, at that moment in time.
Simple, eh?
Hope that helps:>)
2006-07-30 14:02:45 · answer #6 · answered by jayteaches 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just the thought of this question is giving me motion sickness *smile*
Cute...if you run at say 3 miles per hour towards the front of the train which is travelling at 60 miles an hour....does that mean that you're running at a speed of 63 mph....Blimey, gonna try this next time I fly....
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
2006-08-04 08:23:46 · answer #7 · answered by Sky-Dreamer 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you run from the back of the train to the front, and then look back and see yourself still at the back - THEN you'd be seeing the past! Otherwise, sorry, you're not time travelling!
2006-07-30 14:27:22 · answer #8 · answered by mad 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Time has nothing to do with where you are looking on a train. Everything you see is the present.
2006-07-30 13:56:14 · answer #9 · answered by peaco1000 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All of time exists in the same place, all of space exists in the same time . Everything else is just guesswork.
For a more accurate (prehaps) view see Dogen's 'On TimeBeing ', from the Shobogenzo.
2006-07-30 15:28:02 · answer #10 · answered by GreatEnlightened One 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋