because of this, humans somehow established a sense of past, present, and future.
how do we think of time is different from how we experience it.
we think of time in terms of quantifiable data - seconds, days, years of the past and the future.
we experience time only in the present. it is only in the present that we do "work" and the experience of that "work" is the experience of time itself.
the experience of time is more important than the quantifiable concepts or the physical world's definition of time.
therefore the present will always be more valuable than the past and the future.
in this experience of the present [moment], we establish a certain connection with reality. we establish "presence"
time is, in reality, presence (Gegenwart). more correctly the "life-stream of presence." (lebendig stromende Gegewart)
we may now say that time, upon considering only the present, is an endless "presence".
the endless presence is always a tension between "absence" and "presence"
-HISTORICITY, albert dondeyne
------
1. makikitang dependent sa concept of "time" yung essay. kung nagsimula sa pagiging temporal ng human being ang dahilan kung bakit nagkaroon ng sense of past,present, future (sense of time na rin), posible ngang gawa-gawa lang ng tao ang idea ng "time". What if there is no such thing called time?
2. pinag-aaralan ko ngayon kung paano gumamit ng strikethrough sa tula. ano konek? may connection sa experience ng reader, sa presence nung salitang may strikethrough at sa pag-alter ng tenses ng mga salita pabalik sa past. well of course, may mga limitations nga lang dahil hindi pupuwedeng basahin pabigkas ang tulang may strikethrough. e ano ngayon?
9 comments:
1. Verbs are action words. Words that are related to work. The work is the nexus between the present and the past. Why do we work?
2. Consider: "time is the life-stream of presence." The very fact that time is still considered a stream in here means there is a linear understanding of time. Do you think so too?
3. Go back to the beginning: there is the answer.
1.
we "work" because it is only through work that we can manifest our existence. also, without work intersubjectivity is impossible.
work is the nexus/connection between the present and the past. but why is there a need to connect the present and the past if only the present is of primary importance?
2. "life-stream" definitely is not identical with the "stream" we know. we cannot fully consider that as an absolute truth. yes, "life-stream" can represent a linear understanding of time. just because we learned to think of time as being linear. who knows, maybe it is spherical or spiral, etc.
even the idea of time as the endless presence can be questioned. what if humans were all wiped out on earth? will there still be presence? time?
3. human beings are temporal. haha. wasak. diyan nag-umpisa ang lahat. lahat ng debate tungkol sa structure at systems, lahat ng mga constructs. so lahat-lahat nga.
grabe. dumudugo ilong ko.
1. As aforementioned, it is understandable to have a linear understanding of time when it's viewed as a "stream," yet this metaphor could only stretch so far. It merely operates as a background for the proliferation of human experiences, as they are clothed in history. However, the subject experiencing would not so well bow to the linear understanding of time.
2. Experience presents itself relentlessly through the subject. Say, through objective correlatives. As progress through the canvass of this "stream" is made, certain memorabilia are gained, and these snippets of memories present themselves to the subject more frequently because these memories are dear. Each experience presents itself as present. Just as the dread that knowledge of temporality presents itself whenever recalled.
There is time because we care.
additional stuff:
1.
the concept of time and the common understanding of time in general originate from temporality.
2.
Being is comprehensible only on the basis of the consideration of time, the answer to the question of Being cannot lie in an isolated and blind proposition.
from 1 & 2
being cannot exist w/o time. and vice versa. yes eto na yun. :D
monching: e ikaw nga tong nosebleed e. haha. phenomenological :D
pepits: digs. haha.
Pepito: Parang resigned statement ang "There is time because we care." Baka emo nga lang naman ito. Pero oo, there is time because we are aware of temporality, of the temporality of the other person. Kaya nga kay Marcel: to say 143 is to say "for me: you will never die." Galing niya no?
EJ: Since being must not be taken as though it were something to be praised. Being is always the way a being is, always in medias res. Being (small 'b') is corrupted, active, parang may putok sa pakikipagsalamuha. Ganun. Ontologically distant kahit nakikita mo na ang ibang mga kakaniyahan. haha.
Yung temporality, at yung paggamit ng strikethrough, inaabangan ko. Pero personal bias ko, hindi sana mangyaring maging lagalag ang persona kapag kumalas na ito sa kinagisnan. Laging in medias res, in the middle of things, in activity. Parang nilalagyan ko ng social awareness ito a. XD
But who am I to dictate, right?
Sana lang din maalala mo na mamamatay tayo.
...Di ko kayo magets sa ngayon.
:))
/hi bagwisan!philo boys
-Lyza
Wow, fresh readings for next sem. XD
(too late, a comment.)
Post a Comment