The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

Was time invented?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/27/2016 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 503 times Debate No: 91916
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




Time is an invention.
You all may be thinking not, so let me explain.
Time was NOT around in the beginning stages of the world.
That was NOT considered time, that was considered life.
Now, time isn't even a thing.
Time is a mechanism that was created to help keep track of what has been, where we are now, and where we were going.
So if time was created, what is evolution?
Evolution is the process of things, objects, nature, and people adapting more adequately to their surrounding environment, social methods and mental ways of thinking.
See, life without time is confusion.
You need some type of organization to get through life in an orderly fashion.
Without time, you'd be lost, like literally.
And things like sunset and sunrise aren't enough to get you a day.
Now, I'm not saying time didn't exist without out invention, but we categorized it to make it make sense.
Without time, you'd just have a weird gut feeling of something being there.
It would just be there.
You must understand, the word "time" is associated with our invention Time.
You cannot use the word time when describing life before time was there.
Because it was just there and it wasn't called time. It wasn't called evolution.
It was called life.
And life back then would have been a hell of a lot more confusing than it is today.
If someone had not created time.


It seems that my opponent's argument is full of unsubstantiated assertions. He asserts, for instance, that in the beginning stages of the world there was no time, but that is actually false, as time began with the Big Bang of the Universe. Here is what Professor Stephen Hawking says in one of his lectures:

"The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago. The beginning of real time, would have been a singularity, at which the laws of physics would have broken down." [1]

Thus the astrophysics community agrees that time began independent of actual human beings. We could not invent something that began to exist 13.8 billion years before our own existence. Perhaps my opponent is confusing the invented practice of timekeeping and time measurement devices, such as clocks and chronometers. While these have arbitrarily defined, invented units, such as seconds, these are merely ways to observe time. They do not invent time, nor do they cause time to 'happen'.

An analogy could be found in other areas of physics, for instance:
1) Mass was not invented - mass can be shown to objectively exist without the need for humans. Yet we invented ways to measure mass, e.g. scales, and we invented units for mass, such as the kilogram.
2) Light was not invented - light can be shown to objectively exist without the need for humans. Yet we invented ways to measure light, e.g. lux meter, and we invented units for light, such as the lux.

I think the same applies to the concept of time. It exists objectively, and we measure it using our own inventions.

So, to conclude the round, while I appreciate my opponent's poetic thoughts on what time is and how time feels, unfortunately, they do not really work as arguments, for they have no basis in actual physics, which should be seen as the authority in these matters. We can discuss the subjective feeling of time any way we like, but if you want an objective debate, which the resolution requires, you cannot ignore physics, which conclusively show that time is an integral part of the universe.


Debate Round No. 1


lunartrashcan forfeited this round.


Forfeit by Pro. Please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Biodome 2 years ago
A quick note on the quote that I used - Stephen Hawking says that the universe began 15 billion years ago, and that figure conflicts with my own later (and more correct) figure of 13.8 billion years.

The reason for this is that the quote comes from a lecture that was given in 1996, called "The Beginning of Time", and at that time we did not have as effective ways of measuring the age of the universe, so the resulting errors were greater.

Note, however, that this does not affect the argument itself, since it does not ultimately matter when the universe began. What matters is that it actually began, together with time.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff a round, so conduct to Con.