Memory and consensus of past events solidifies history for us. Very obvious events, such as "I was typing on the keyboard at 17:89 GMT 9/25/06", seem determined, unchangeable and therefore necessary.
But, if we have a new way of looking at what has transpired, does the past change or is this an indication that the past is indeterminate?
Worse yet, aren't, on some level, false beliefs of the past just as real as the true ones? To resist the question you need to appeal to objective reality, so it's circular to claim false beliefs of the past aren't as real.
2006-08-25 12:41:39 · 7 answers · asked by -.- 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
By circular I mean the picture of history as a necessary succesion of events that were at one time real, requires that we assume history this way in order to prove it. That is, the justification that question-beggingly true beliefs about past events were at one time real, whereas question-beggingly false beliefs were not requires the preconception noted above.
Theoretically, it makes sense that there is one true objective reality... and we simply discover it when we defenestrate former interpretations in favor of more convincing ones. I'm saying, however, that its an assumption, and as the quintessential case of necessity, necessity too falls by the wayside.
2006-08-25 14:20:07 · update #1
good, good, I'm in a rush, but I had a glance at the challenges. Thinking about time is prone to such folly.
2006-08-26 06:04:56 · update #2
anything can change, even the past, but many people are not ready for that... the history is not the one that everyone read into a book... everything is manipulated by different interest... political or religious... the truth is out there... but no one is ready to open the eyes... and no one is ready to reveal it... unfortunately some people know more things than others and can't speak coz the others aren't ready to hear...
but anything is possible
2006-08-25 13:02:25 · answer #1 · answered by altin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How can it be determinate? It doesn't even exist. The previous second for example was a mixture of unending peoples actions, objects positions, planet movements, etc.
You cannot determine something that you are part of.
History is just the imprint of the past in our mind.
It's like trying to say how the world was in the 1995 by looking at my photo from back then.
Does it really describe anything?
But still history is just a part of the present and has nothing to do with the past.
Think of this:
As I was sitting and watching the one thousands years old image of star, thinking of my last weeks' break up I heard the 2 seconds old sound of a car crash. When I realized what happened it had all passed. If I was writing all of these in video would the hour clock of the video represent when did all these things happen?
What is determined in that?
I mean, that the image of the star was out there before I was born and will still be traveling in space after I die.
Time is just a construction of human mind so as to put things in order as he perceives them.
2006-08-25 23:25:54 · answer #2 · answered by Divra 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is possible to look at past events in a new light. I have labored under illusions due to having jumped to conclusions about what someone else was telling me, without giving him the opportunity to finish saying what he intended to say. I thought he was boasting of some foul crime.
It was not until years later, when I lost a good friend (two, actually) because one of them would not let me finish saying what I meant to say and jumped to conclusions about what he thought I was going to say next, and persuaded the other person as to my (supposed) intentions, so that I lost two friends.
Suffering with the injustice of the situation caused me eventually to reflect upon the earlier situation and realize that I had indeed been unfair to my other friend in much the same manner. It was a very humiliating realization, and I have regretted blaming him for my own apprehension. All he was actually referring to, was a situation in which he had defended himself from someone who abused him.
I only hope and pray that someday my later friends will be willing to discuss the matter and listen to me and hear me out this time, and realize that they need have no anxiety concerning me.
The past is inviolable, in that we cannnot alter it, but our perceptions are not always correct. Sometimes I think that at least half the misery in the world is caused by someone thinking "That OTHER PERSON knows EXACTLY how much what they are saying and doing is irritating me, AND THEY ARE DOING IT ON PURPOSE!"
How wrong we are. What foolish, fearful assumptions we make.
2006-08-25 15:03:16 · answer #3 · answered by cdf-rom 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm going to jump in with both feet here. i do believe that all time happened all at once, but we only perceive it in a linear manner. BUT, i'm going to sound like i'm arguing with myself when i say that history was written by the victors, so what do we really know about truth?...and to complicate matters further, i think it's all fluid and moving and changing. for example, does anyone besides me remember seeing on the news that nelson mandela died in prison, but we know very well that he didn't. there are a lot more examples of this sort of thing. what was true once doesn't necessarily apply now, but that doesn't mean that it won't apply again some time in the future....maybe circular doesn't describe it....how about a giant mixing bowl with things moving and swirling all the time?
2006-08-25 13:30:39 · answer #4 · answered by sheepherder 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Thc level achieved is detrimental to the question.
2006-08-25 13:16:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you mean "predetermined" ? in either case:No. Hazardous accidents can always happens.
2006-08-26 02:27:53 · answer #6 · answered by Nicolette 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i have no idea what you are talking about!
2006-08-25 12:44:45 · answer #7 · answered by Lil Tiff 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋