English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-09-02 18:54:54 · 19 answers · asked by Aken 3 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

Let's take an apple. An apple has 3 spatial dimensions and a 4th time dimension.

Let's take a thought about an apple. A thought, arguably, doesn't have spatial dimensions(agree?). But, can it be argued that it has a time dimension?

A point has, by definition, NO dimension. If one is a Platonist, one might argue that the point "exists". But what distinguishes point A from point B? They would have to be at different positions in at least one dimension(a line is one-dimensional)

So does something that "exist" necessarily exist in a dimensional grid such as space-time?

How about space-time itself? In what context does it "exist"?

2007-09-02 20:47:35 · update #1

19 answers

Ok, I don't mean to be a smart a$%, but if something exists, then it exists.

Can you say DUH?!

2007-09-02 19:13:27 · answer #1 · answered by Frinn 6 · 1 1

An apple with no time dimension does not exist. It would be what physicists would call a "virtual" object, since it would have no effect on the universe. On the other hand, an apple with duration but no spatial dimension would be a spatial singularity, having gravity and time, but occupying no physical space. It could exist, due to having a position within space.
A thought, rather than being a discrete object, is a Process in the brain. The brain itself would therefore experience the thought as an event or concurring events, with a certain duration, taking place in certain areas of the brain, therefore also having a spatial dimension. The thought exists for that duration, and is recorded in memory. Thoughts can recur, or be recreated to occupy areas of the brain again, or replayed from memory.
EDIT;\
Also, thoughts can be translated into different media, or transformed into communication, then back again into thought in a different mind. Is it the same thought? The wider question implied could be, "are any objects the same object from one moment, condition or position to the next? or are ALL objects actually ongoing events the way thoughts are?" Existence is not static. Objects that exist do not remain precisely the same from one moment to the next because there is always at least some slight change in its condition or position. So do all objects truly exist, meaning to have duration, or are they "virtual" objects merely imperfect copies of the ones present in the previous moment? Is existence Discontinuous?
As for the existence of time and space. Hmmm. They are dimensions, directions in which travel is possible, or which can be occupied by the presence of things or no-things, but presence. Without presence, they would not exist, however, do they exist present in each other? Does time have a spatial presence, existing in three dimensions? Space certainly has a time presence. Space takes time to get through, space has been around for a long time. It seems reasonable, then, that time would occupy space as well, and if you consider that time must be present throughout all spaces or they would not exist, having no duration, then it seems clear that time does occupy space, and space, time, inextricably bound together.

2007-09-11 00:20:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

As a layman, I find this an extremely interesting question to ponder over.

The first thought that comes to my mind is a thought... its existence can not be denied because it has such a great influence through generating actions.... but seems to exist without occupying any obvious space. Does it occupy time.... it probably does because we can not harbor unlimited number of thoughts at the same time. I really can't put my mind on to anything that has a 'timeless' existence, perhaps because timelessness is a concept we can only imagine through something like 'timefulness', in other words, existing for all times or 'eternal' which exists through all dimensions of time without changing.

To my limited capability of conceptualization and imagination, any existence outside time seems to be impossible although existence without space appears to be very much possible.

2007-09-03 03:01:22 · answer #3 · answered by small 7 · 1 1

That is a tough question. Does the past exist? It does in my memory and it does in history books and on the web. Kant would tell you that existence is not a predicate. By this I think he meant that you can take away all of an object's properties; color, shape, size, location, etc. and when you were done there would not be something left over called existence. I'm not sure he was right and very much depends on an answer to this being correct. Idealists and Realists have fought over this question for a long time. Then there are the people who think that Plato, who disagrees with Kant on this topic, and Kant both got it wrong. They would have you start all over. Heidegger is an example of this. We are not likely to solve this tonight.
To the "Realists" who are saying that all of human thought and history are a waste of time. Who told you that common sense was king in the land of philosophy? I don't see how you can be good community contributors with such disdain for thought. You are haughty and insulting, not to me, but to your community. For shame.

2007-09-03 02:09:13 · answer #4 · answered by Sowcratees 6 · 1 0

If you take the thought about an apple... when did you think about it and where did you think about it? A space in time.

If you take an actual point (ie not the "point" of a question), then it must have a location and time reference. A space in time.

2007-09-11 01:36:40 · answer #5 · answered by J K 3 · 0 0

Of course! Sooner or later, whether know or then, here or there, that which can be neither created nor destroyed had, and has, it's place in a void that has no size or shape, but exist because it does and because it doesn't, but even when it didn't it did, and always will because everything has it's time, even before time and most certainly after time!

2007-09-03 03:21:15 · answer #6 · answered by bailingwirewillfixit 3 · 0 1

Maybe I am being foolish, but the concept of zero, of nothing exist. It is a true concept mathematically proved. However nothing doesn't really exist -- does that fulfill your criteria?

Since it doesn't exist but is real,isn't it outside space-time?

I apologize for whatever headaches I have caused.

2007-09-03 09:16:56 · answer #7 · answered by Fuzzy 7 · 1 0

Depends who's talking and what they think they mean by it ... it sure seems like some people who use the word, use it to refer to things that aren't out there, but they usually don't seem aware of that.

"Philosophical problems arise when language goes on holiday," and the word exist is nearly always on holiday. It certainly left the building when you asked this question.

2007-09-03 02:12:11 · answer #8 · answered by zilmag 7 · 0 1

Not necessary as your thoughts exist but not in space-time.

2007-09-03 02:46:09 · answer #9 · answered by sv 7 · 2 0

Thats like asking do we really move, if i was to take many pictures quickly of a car driving each picture would show the car as being stopped so does it reall ever move?

2007-09-07 11:02:47 · answer #10 · answered by Patron 3 · 0 1

Space-time is a material plane state of affairs only. Other planes exist.

2007-09-03 17:29:09 · answer #11 · answered by Theron Q. Ramacharaka Panchadasi 4 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers