I'd agree in part but only in a microcosmic or personal sense - on a
larger scale where events come to have only a more local
significance, then time can be seen to divide coherent periods of the
a similar nature - much as any other form of measurement. Indeed,
even with the specific personal event in question, it is likely that
Moose will be engaged in essentially the same task but hopefully with
a slightly better and more rewarding tool. The event itself has not
divided one kind of thing from another but qualities of the same kind
of thing. Thus, as with spacial distinctions, it is a division by
degree and not kind.
Of course, if one regards time as a thing in itself rather than
merely the container of 'things', then all bets are off.
(Now if all this sounds sensible to you after three readings or less,
then I can recommend my therapist...)
Andrew Fildes (who prefers Bergsson on 'the Comic')
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 10/11/2007, at 4:39 PM, John Morton wrote:
> Henri Bergson, extending the investigations undertaken by G.F.B.
> Riemann, expressed the concept of duration in terms of the
> multiplicity which most characterizes it. While space divides by
> degree - with two extensions of measure resulting when one
> extension is divided - time divides in kind: an event which
> separates two durations distinguishes the before from the after as
> different kinds of things.
>
> Having been party to Moose's grand expectations, we shall have a
> chance to assess this theory for ourselves upon the event of the
> arrival of the item in question...
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|