No responses? How about a joke... A crowd of people is assembled in a public place to view the performance of a "magician". The magician explains that he can do a magical deed, observable by all, and sets his hat down to collect the applause money. He performs the magical deed of producing a gold coin from his empty hands, with no possibility of cheating because he is wearing only briefs. He tosses the gold coin into the hat and produces another, which he tosses into the hat. As the crowd applauds, he asks for donations, and a few coins are tossed his way, which he puts into the hat. The following observations are made : 1) A Priest sees the performance, and thinks "Perhaps I have seen a miracle", he hurries away to tell his confessor. 2) A Physicist sees the same, and thinks "Perhaps I have seen evidence of a violation of natural law", and rushes off to write a new theory. 3) An Engineer sees the same, and thinks, "Perhaps I can build a machine to do that", he approaches the magician and asks him to talk in private when he is done performing. 4) A Businessman sees the same, and sidles up to the magician. He whispers in the magician's ear "I will let you have 20% of the profits if you let me license your act". 5) A Pickpocket sees the same first coin appear, and while everyone is oohing and aahing at the spectacle, he works the crowd, escaping with a dozen wallets and a new appreciation of magicians. 6) A policeman sees the same, works his way through the crowd to the magician and demands to see his license for public performing. 7) Well, I could go on but the point should be made by now...
They all saw the same event, yet none of them really perceived what happened, because they were too busy filtering their senses with preconceptions. The point which I am trying to make here as regards my first post is that I do NOT claim any special ability or knowledge, rather I think that there are millions of people who have experienced at least one of those three examples above. Due to cultural bias, the discussion of such topics is left to those who are considered insane, because the mere claim that such things occur is a-priori evidence of insanity as judged by the current crop of psychologists. Would it not be better to examine the possibility of such things occurring (the message), rather than labeling all who observe them (the messengers) as insane? Within this newsgroup epistemology, I expect that there are dozens if not hundreds who were led to the subject itself due to the fundamental question being raised in their own minds regarding the nature of reality in general, and time in particular. In my personal experience there have been two occasions when something which I observed was also observed by another person (in both cases total strangers). In both cases they rejected the observation with the equivalent of the logical sequence : 1) Unless I am going crazy, something impossible just happened. 2) I am very sane, and cannot afford to be judged crazy. 3) Since I am sane, impossible things do not happen. 4) Therefor I will forget that it ever happened. As someone says in his signature (I could Google it, but am too lazy) "I reject your reality, and substitute my own." If there is an authoritative non-mystical, non-religious, treatment of the topic "Nature of time" OUTSIDE of fiction, I would greatly appreciate a reference. I am well aware of the dozens of science fiction books which SPECULATE on the topic. My interest ranges from amusement to disgust in such cases... Lonnie Courtney Clay formerly "Laughing Crazy Coot" - no longer laughing, trying to overcome crazy, but unfortunately still a balding old coot... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemol...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
