4 ms·
The answer i've read is that he _logically_ precedes it, not _temporally_. But yes that only makes a tad more sense :)
by chubs 6y ago
The answer i've read is that he _logically_ precedes it, not _temporally_. But yes that only makes a tad more sense :)
- sudosysgen 6y agoHmm, I'd be interested to see how one could define logical causality without accidently defining something that has all of the properties of time!
- FeepingCreature 6y agoThat's a distinction without a difference though.
- ben_w 6y agoThere is a potential difference, I think. Consider if this universe exists only as a simulation (I’ve met some theists making this category of comparison but with different language). The laws of physics are identical in both directions for the arrow of time, so the starting point of the simulation from the point one view of the outside universe can be any point in time from the perspective of the inhabitants. In this case, the “before” in the outer universe is a logical rather than temporal one from the point of view of us inhabitants. (Disclaimer: my philosophy qualification is really bad)
- sudosysgen 6y agoWell yes, from our point of view. But I'd understand that there still must be something like time from the point of view of those that wrote the simulation.