Many things can travel in time in our imagination, our dreams. I’m not sure what you mean by remote viewing and pre-determinism. This is the problem in philosophy. Everyone is speaking a different language. All views whether it is your idea of remote viewing or pre-determinism (whatever that means), can only be expressed in the present moment. We live in the present. You cannot show me an example of where we don’t live, speak, think, sleep, write, talk, in the here and now, not yesterday, and not tomorrow. These imaginings about the past and future are also in the here and now. If we had amnesia, we would live like animals in the present. They don’t remember the past and do not have the capability to imagine the future, which is all part of the brain’s ability to remember and to think about the future, IN THE PRESENT.
It isn’t imagination and you’re wrong. Imagination is not what you think it is or what most think it is. Near everything is possible to exist, merely about separating the noise and the plausible. The imagery is important. I have a thread that explains why. The impossibility of a possibility. It’s due to what you’re promoting here and I explain why psychologically.
The subconscious/unconscious mind that can grant imagery to the conscious surface has no discretion of time.
cia.gov/library/readingroom … 00250015-6
For some reason they took the images off the pdf there, I wonder why… maybe too many catching on that aren’t using it responsibly. They took a lot of the evidence off, it’s 5 pages now. I have the original 28 page pdf. Send me your email or something, I will send it to you. Let me know if this doesn’t work. I uploaded it. docdro.id/Tc8QVH7
Also Meno I think meant to say “foundation” not founsatio, you can tell he’s in a rush typing.
Once again, that’s the body you reference, not the mind. Ever talk to someone and they weren’t present listening? One can be in the past or future in their mind and a lot of times if logically/reasonably accurate, it’s a true prediction of it.
Attained balance = timeless awareness.
Yes, Peace Girl, that was a mistake. We all live in the image. The IMAGO the original film, of experience which does not translate into am awareness , until the word, which was in the beginning.
Philosophy does talk in many languages, and it is the responsibility of conscious thought to sort it out.
That kind of activity can not be done without imagination to conxiebe succession and hierarchy that only the word can introduce.
That is the primal failure of the fall and no secondary derivitive of it, to live without imagination, to ignore words which mean something otjer then a warning .The warning does not
necessarily imply determination in order to love a life, except to mean -driven to find truth, and act accordingly.
Every generation has.to live the truthful life , anew, relearning it by themselves, because otherwise it consists of mere directives in a dusty manual.
The Bible is the best seller of all times, yet has lost meaning for many in the sue course of time, it’s imagery has been superimposed into a recording image.
Marcus Aurelious said it well, when he said that an untested wisdom is not wise. A superimposition with Botticelli’s Venus emerging from the see, may indicate a dial interpretation. between the sound of the roaring sea. With God yelling at his Son: " Watch out and see, it is merely a shell, a seashell."
Nut of course being a little kid he goes for Her, and Pa tries to cover for him by by ‘discovering’ the futility
of self sacrifice.
But that is another story, partial to other expression of feelings, justified by a different set of rules, within the imagimation of Other Minds
It can just as well be asserted that the saying " live in the present is merely a metaphor. I am writing this determenently, in order to understand time, and end up with a metaphore, no matter how you slice it.
The present moment is already gone as soon as it is lived. We always live predeterminately on a conscious level, and in the proximate future as the last flows into the future.
This can be imagined or illustrated. Y set theory as well.
The perfect essence of the imperfect reflection must end sadly, paradoxically, because perfect presence implies slicing the gap between the relative and the absolute set up to a scintilla of a slice: where a scintilla is immeasurable.
Time expanded into the very tiniest segments end with uncertainty which is the quanta of temporaluty.
In that sense the flow of time covers that minute gap between conscious and unconscious flow.
There really is only relative time and the relation must be a measure of one signified epoch to another.
Signification depends on signs, and since the present has no sign , it is not significant enough to take measure of.
It is merely a metaphore, her and now, as well as the next nano second.
Imagination is , on the other hand, capable of recreating a time such as one can imagine of suspended animation. But then again, that implies Other minds, and verification of shared imminance takes more than telepathy, recognition .
That those kinds of states are absolutely certain to have arisen, is within the boundaries of certainty as well.
But the imagery that someone is experiencing is in the present Artimas. We don’t live in the past.
And that imagery being brought to the conscious surface is happening in the present.
I thought so, especially when I looked it up and couldn’t find the word. But because there are so many philosophical terms that are important to the concept, it behooves the poster to try to be as clear as possible.
That’s not what I’m referring to. Any thought we’re having in the present about the past is related to the memory we have in our mind. If we lose the memory we lost the connection to the past. We don’t live in the past Artimas. We do everything in the present, even remember past events.
We can have remembrances of time past, but we cannot actually live in a time period that has already occurred (or for that matter in a time period that has yet to occur) except in our thoughts (which are occurring in the present). If we lose that memory due to amnesia, that experience doesn’t exist for us because it’s not in the here and now. Why do animals not fret about the past? Because the connection to the memory center in their brain is not developed due to lack of language.
Animals aren’t as complex as humans yet. Animals don’t fret about the past because they appreciate simplicity of the present. They are determined and easily shaped by environment, lack of consciousness.
That’s the beauty or point Pg, we can take the information without experiencing it from past/future, this is the differentiation between us and lower conscious animals, which I view them as sub/unconscious, due to their knowing but not possessing the ability to understand complexity through a-priori.
We could possibly physically recreate past/future moment, by altering environment to match specific times. With the future this is a given, the past would be trickier.
What if you have no direct memory, what if you’re fed memory through the collective sub/unconscious? Via imagery. And this collective is an infinite of time past and future. Like a cloud of data.
It is true that to live a truthful life we cannot learn everything vicariously. We have to experience life for ourselves to gain true wisdom. That is why children feel the need to experience life on their own terms as they become young adults. Still not sure what this has to do with the truth that man’s will is not free and what this means for our benefit. 
can just as well be asserted that the saying " live in the present is merely a metaphor. I am writing this determenently, in order to understand time, and end up with a metaphore, no matter how you slice it.
The present moment is already gone as soon as it is lived. We always live predeterminately on a conscious level, and in the proximate future as the last flows into the future.
This can be imagined or illustrated. by set theory as well.
The perfect essence of the imperfect reflection must end sadly, paradoxically, because perfect presence implies slicing the gap between the relative and the absolute set, up to a scintilla of a slice: where a scintilla is immeasurable.
Time expanded into the very tiniest segments end with uncertainty which is the quanta of temporality.
In that sense the flow of time covers that minute gap between conscious and unconscious flow.
There really is only relative time and the relation must be a measure of one signified epoch to another.
Signification depends on signs, and since the present has no sign , it is not significant enough to take measure of.
( look around you and see if you can re-cognise you that which was not there a moment ago?)
It is merely a metaphore, here and now, as well as the next nano second.
Imagination is , on the other hand, capable of recreating a time such as one can imagine of suspended animation. But then again, that implies Other minds, and verification of shared imminance takes more than telepathy, recognition .
That those kinds of states are absolutely certain to have arisen, is within the boundaries of certainty as well.
We can definitely alter the environment to match something we experience only in our minds, but again this can only happen in the present.
Every thought, every memory that is fed through collective sub/unconscious via imagery, is happening now. How can it not be? IOW, if the collective subconscious that feeds memory through imagery is lost and can no longer be retrieved due to an accident, all we would have is the present because that is all that exists.
But the past created the now. So is it not due to the past that there is a present at all? I would argue the present is an illusion, it’s always gone. Everything is either recent past or near future. That’s why it’s a continuity.
In extacy, or an ecstatic present it is possible , but the discovery relies on an imminance, that can not be demonstrated to transcend time. It is merely a hands -on ima go of the present
Stepping out on that limb and trying something entirely different can also cause greater satisfaction and a stretching of the self.
The significance of the present moment is related to past moments. If we couldn’t connect the past to the present through memory, we would not be able to make meaningful choices. But all of the imagery that we experience subconsciously, all the memories, the feelings, the recollections, are being experienced in the present.
[i] The word ‘past’ is
obviously the perception of a relation that appears undeniable because
it has reference to the revolution of the earth on its axis in relation to
the sun. You are conscious that it takes a certain length of time to do
something, and because you are also conscious of space you perceive
that as you traverse a point from here to there what is left behind as
you travel is called the past, and your destination is the future. Here
lies a great fallacy that was never completely understood, for how is it
humanly possible for there to be such a thing as the past and future
when in reality all we ever have is the present? Yet we have a word to
describe something that has no existence in the real world.
Socrates never lived in the past — he lived in the present, although our
recollection of him allows us to think back to this time period. The
reason we say that Socrates lived in the past is because this particular
individual is no longer here. But is it possible for you to say that God
existed in the past? Does anyone ever sleep in the past; does the sun
ever shine in the past; is it possible for you to do anything in the past?
If you were sitting up on a high cloud these last ten thousand years,
never asleep, you would have watched Socrates in the present, just as
you are watching me write this book in the present.
[/i]
Artimas,
Have you never lived in or experienced the "here and now"moment, Artimas, where there is no recent past or near future? It is almost like time stands still though that too is an illusion but a wonderful one.
That’s a leap , and some leaps have to be decided immediately, without any notion of con sequences.
This is why most people weighing the probability of a fall when trying to decide to stay on a precipice or jump, tend to stay within the confines of the traditional and the used to. That is the point, right on, Arc.
The knowledge of man’s true nature transcends time itself because it’s timeless.
This point has been touched upon BEFORE, its an implication, therefore figuratively, toward transcendental awareness.
Time is of the essence is my point.
And at this point an eternal recurrence happens, subject to Saint Anselm.
The perception of time is relative. If a person is bored at work, time seems to go slow. If he’s busy, time seems to go much faster. If he’s involved in an interesting project, time seems to go very fast. People will often say, “Where has the time gone”? Some people call that “flow”.
The ignoring of scientific effects on Preception (absolute) they call naive realism. That is some skeptics’ view of Saint Anselm, though admiration is due those who can re-integrate the old with the new, and avoid a redundant eternal re-occurance (as somehow distinct from recurrence);
but the matter with Cosmology has not yet been cleared, and that was the major premise.
I do apologise in thinking primarily through philosophy, and that is why perhaps I’m having difficulty with explaing what I mean, and can not out stay my welcome in others’cover.
Maybe its a.good thing , though, because we are , as children of the god, all searching for truth and the method by which we can differentiate it from evil.
Maybe good challenges evil to to prove once and.for all , the way things must go down , presumably for the much , much better and show absolutely who the winner is.
In some view, there are no winners or losers, because once we realize who or what God really is, the return of one to the other. is merely a.constant oscillation. , without which existence It’s self could not have produced a primordial condition to form existence as understood.
Here is where bondedness and boundaries seek clarification .
Maybe we should start by defining evil, for that is the central issue. Isn’t the supplication that God may deliver us from all evil the reason for our prayers?
Before that may we add a video that may serve as an intervening variable in form of a clue to be discerned?
Course this could serve as a tangent or even post scriptively toward it. Whatever object we seem to attach to evil.
And please do not ask for relevance in the present sense, for cohesion can only begotten bilaterally, after the fact, meaning similar to Your thesis of understanding postscriptivelly a presumptive transcendental event as performative .