3 ms·
Written three years after Einstein's paper on special relativity, which kills the idea of an absolute order of events (if they're far enough apart in space). Wo
by dghf 11y ago
Written three years after Einstein's paper on special relativity, which kills the idea of an absolute order of events (if they're far enough apart in space). Would McTaggart have had knowledge of Einstein's work?
- pdpi 11y agoOn the other hand, relativity gives very concrete rules for how time behaves, Which would make time a very well behaved unreality.
- ommunist 11y agoSo, much depends from the observer, right?
- lnanek2 11y agoHis education is in morals and logic and his conclusion in subsequent books is that everything is related by souls. I would say even if he had heard of or read about real science regarding spacetime, he wouldn't even have been able to understand it anyway. It would be like an alchemist understanding atomic numbers and nuclei, they are completely different fields.
- ommunist 11y agothis is dangerous speculation. Bright minds easily pick up different systems of explanations. Deliberate exposition of knowledge is completely other thing. For example being chrystian on public for political purpose. It is the same with scientific publications. Those rarely describe actual level of understanding that writer may have.
- dempseye 11y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
- hyperpape 11y agoThe debate over presentism vs. eternalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(philosophy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(philosophy)) is alive and well, and conducted by many people who are well aware of Einstein's theory. Still, of the main arguments for the eternalist view comes from special relativity (one source: http://www.amazon.com/Four-Dimensionalism-Ontology-Persistence-Association-Occasional/dp/0199263523 http://www.amazon.com/Four-Dimensionalism-Ontology-Persisten...), and I think it's rather compelling, as far as it goes.