more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
It seems we are forced to measure the rate of time's passing against itself. But that's just not a meaningful rate. So time has no rate. So it doesn't flow. So there is no such thing as temporal passage.
Gist of Idea
It is meaningless to measure the rate of time using time itself, and without a rate there is no flow
Source
Baron,S/Miller,K (Intro to the Philosophy of Time [2019], 2.3.1)
Book Ref
Baron,S/Miller,K: 'Introduction to the Philosophy of Time' [Polity 2019], p.43
A Reaction
It is suggested that you can exchange dollars one for one, so time might move at one second per second. But you can't exchange your own dollars with yourself at one-for-one. That is meaningless. Time is NOT a substance which flows.
| 5561 | If time involved succession, we must think of another time in which succession occurs [Kant] |
| 14615 | If time flows, then 'how fast does it flow?' is a tricky question [Smart] |
| 22934 | Time can't speed up or slow down, so it doesn't seem to be a 'process' [Le Poidevin] |
| 16265 | If time passes, presumably it passes at one second per second [Maudlin] |
| 22898 | What is time's passage relative to, and how fast does it pass? [Bardon] |
| 22999 | It is meaningless to measure the rate of time using time itself, and without a rate there is no flow [Baron/Miller] |