The bilateral notion of time entails that past moments somehow flow into the future just like future moments flow into the past. Below are visualizations of two unilateral concepts of time, as well as the bilateral concept of time:
Past ↽ Future
Past ⇀ Future
Past ⇌ Future
The past precedes the future by necessity, but this does not mean that the past flows into the future. The present moment is like a rock in a flowing river. As long as time exists, the present moment is constant, since there would always have to be a present moment if any duration of time is in existence. But the present moment does not advance--it is always the present, always locked in place. Just like water from ahead of the rock flows past it, future moments become past moments once they become present moments and elapse. The parts of a river closest to the rock have to flow past the rock before the following parts can do so. This is analogous to what I mean when I refer to the "unilateral flow" of time from the future into the past, with a subsequent future moment replacing an elapsed moment as the present in a specific sequence. While past events precede future events, it is not also true that the past flows into the future in the way that future moments literally flow into the past.
If someone says that time flows from past to future, all that they are doing is calling the past the future and the future the past whenever they claim that the past flows into the future. Conceptually, what they describe still, in any given set of moments, reduces down to the (correct) model of time where future moments become the present, and present moments elapse and go into the past. The only difference lies in the terms they use. There is still a present moment, and time flows inflexibly from one side of the present moment to the other. There is no such thing as a bilateral flow of time because the bilateral model has the same problems as the concept shown in the middle illustration above. Since the past cannot flow into the future, it is impossible for both the past and the future flow into each other, just as a river does not flow in opposing directions simultaneously.
Since any bilateral model of time reduces down to the unilateral model when deconstructed, the unilateral model is the only one that can correct. There are claims about time that are even more pathetic than those of the bilateral model, though! Some might even go so far as to suggest that there is no ultimate metaphysical distinction between the past, present, and future at all, treating all moments of time as one singular thing. The very fact that a particular moment ceases to be the present as soon as I reflect on it disproves this in full. If all moments of time are the same moment, then it would be impossible to distinguish between one moment and another. The fact that I can distinguish them is the start of establishing the unilateral flow of time.
Sometimes those who are ignorant of rationalism will do their best to articulate utter bullshit in the hopes that they will come across as sophisticated, intelligent people. This seems to be the case when people make many of the asinine comments about time that tend to be treated as deep or enigmatic. Although some regard is as indecipherable, time isn't a particularly complex existent. It exists. It is unilateral in its flow. Ironically, it doesn't require an extraordinary amount of time to realize these truths.
[1]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2018/03/countable-infinities.html
[2]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-logic-of-time-travel-part-3.html
No comments:
Post a Comment