The Instigator
Skept
Pro (for)
The Contender
DanD
Con (against)

Time itself is not flowing thing

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
DanD has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/6/2018 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 298 times Debate No: 106450
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Skept

Pro

Even though we express that time flows, we can also express that time is a fixed thing, and things move from time to time. Therefore, time itself is not flowing thing.
DanD

Con

The argument here is extremely weak. It states that because time can be expressed as static, and expressed as flowing, it is static. This is a bizarre claim. The mere fact that something can be expressed a certain way does not mean it is that way. I can express the moon as being made of cheese, but it is not.
Debate Round No. 1
Skept

Pro

My arguments do not imply time itself is static. "Time itself is not flowing thing" does not mean 'time itself is static.' The time itself is also not the static thing. We just express the time as the static or flowing thing.
DanD

Con

Well, I thought your thesis was that time is not a flowing thing. Anyway, perhaps there is a false dichotomy here. We are given two options: either time is a flowing thing or a time is a static thing. But, perhaps there is a third option. Namely, why must we assume that time is a thing at all? Immanuel Kant put forth a fascinating view on time in the Transcendental Aesthetic of Critique of Pure Reason. There, he argues that time is not an object that is mind-independent, a real thing that exists outside of us in the same way as objects like tables, chairs, books, etc. Instead, time is framework through which we view reality. It is the form of our awareness of our inner states and of external reality. One way that Kant attempted to demonstrate the nature of time is through a thought experiment. Imagine a typical experience. Let us say we are walking down a street--there are cars, trees, grass, people, etc. One by one, we can remove each thing from the scene. But the one thing we cannot remove is time. Can anyone imagine a timeless scene? The scene is always in time. Therefore, time must be different than the objects that occupy the scene. It is the foundational framework through which we cognize reality.
Debate Round No. 2
Skept

Pro

We do not know the thing itself. We know the knowledge about the thing itself is different with knowledge from impressions. Therefore, time itself is not flowing and static thing.

We also represent time is flowing and static. Similarly, we express quantum is wave and particle. False dichotomy via ordinary words still explains the physical world as it is.

'Thing' I noted does not mean directly recognizable thing like the chair.
Kant's arguments you referred do not rebut 'time itself is not flowing thing.'
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by canis 6 months ago
canis
"Time itself is not flowing thing".
No it is "now"..So timeless..In it self..
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.