2007-12-13 05:10:07 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
when you think about it, it will be past. the present is only present in the present. the past is always the past and the future will be the past.
2007-12-13 05:15:47 · answer #1 · answered by benartny 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes it will. but then there will be a new future soon to be the present. And the current present will become the past when the future should arrive.
2007-12-18 07:13:11 · answer #2 · answered by Alex.Edwards 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like thinking about time, it sharpens the mind. I think about time until I find myself being impossibly places within impossibly minute instants of time. It is often as though I were about to find something extremely wonderful, or lose something very familiar. The time future will remain the future always, endlessly, as time is a limitless entity, endless just the way its counterpart the endless space is in the mind.
The future is a certain possibility in the mind universal where it will never change, and neither will change its conceptual reality in our perception - the future always receding into itself, the present always stay with us, and the past always following. But the nature of time in the mind of an individual thinker is somewhat different, it is an idea that will change all the time, it will change every time it is thought about.
The future that is me will become the present that would also be me, but then that me would not be what I am now. And if I will not be what I am now then neither will be what I have as the future or the past now. The present that is still in the future is the future but also an idea in my mind - my future is my idea..
In the mind universal nothing changes, the time present, the future or the past, but in my mind all things change, all the time: not only the future, and the present but also the past, as I change.
2007-12-13 13:43:33 · answer #3 · answered by Shahid 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If the present is a train at speed and the future is the next tree which flies past your head into the past. The train never leaves the present but the trees never really become the present; just always passing by. Therefore time is irrelevant to the tree but paramount to the train.
Einstein states that perception of time is only relevant to the [individual] observer.
2007-12-13 17:07:24 · answer #4 · answered by The Will 2 Defy 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
when the future arrives it will b present for the future, future for the present and past for the far off future.
2007-12-13 13:29:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you want something and plan for it to happen at any other time than the present then you have given a tangible sense of dimension to the future. Then when what you planned for has reached the point you wanted it to happen, its an example of the future becoming the present.
2007-12-13 14:37:14 · answer #6 · answered by pingpong 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The future never "arrives." It's always the future!
1. The time ahead; those moments yet to be experienced.
2. Something that will happen in moments yet to come.
2007-12-13 13:19:48 · answer #7 · answered by Nick 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The future is always the future. The present is the present. The past is the past. How is Philosophy these days? The future, the present or the past. I exist so I am. But who told you, you existed anyway.
2007-12-13 13:15:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
the future on its arrival becomes the present
2007-12-13 13:15:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes and certain thinkers of physics and linguistics both, have long resolved of this to good measure in theory. However, the linguist gives us something more tangible to work with here, something we can more closely have in hand.
Allow this demonstration as testament: linguists present a simple verity of syntax known to those who mastered that great and difficult craft -- Writing -- and who know to use the "perfect tense forms" with great economy.
Such as in this little example, which I place in 'italics marks' to draw out the point:
" In the year 2010, I 'will have had' 3 years to increase my IRA's net value to $50,000.00."
Here is the case of someone who has projected oneself into the future, though is now in the present reflecting on what the past time will manifest for his or her future, yet for which he or she is now in the present time.
Enclosed in this syntax is "will have had." This addresses your question directly.
The word 'will' speaks to the future;
the word 'have' is the now of events and references the past that has been collapsed such that you are now in the present looking backward in time,
and finally the word 'had' addresses the past itself on which you once reflected about when in the then prospective moment of present time that proposes what you fancied to occur in the future.
In physical terms, these three -- past, present, and future -- exist at once simultaneously and are ubiquitous.
'Hope this does not come off as too confusing...
2007-12-19 19:33:58 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
this is one of my favrite paradox's to think about when im bored.cos...
if point X inthe future is the future
then when ur at point X in the future point X is the present
so future is the present when you reach the future then new future is made and future of current is not called future it is now present.
basically
the future is ahead of you and when u reach the future a new future has formed and the future you have just reached is the present.
2007-12-13 15:05:40 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋