Tuesday, March 23, 2010

emiT- tragoB ennA

"Ultimately, one cannot touch time. We grasp it with our minds, not our hands." While I was reading this essay and arrived at this line I just felt to inspired. I stopped reading and wrote my Writing assignment for this week. Towards the end of her essay she tends to stray away from what is interesting, pushing on even though much more isn't really needed. As a whole I came away with some pretty good and insightful passages. Some were so deep that I don't really know where to begin in interpreting it. "The essence of time as most concretely experienced is the continuous unbroken passage of existence." Umm. What?



  1. Yeah I agree, there are many illuminating parts to this piece and some of them can be confusing. I think that last quote though refers to the idea that most people experience time as being a continuous forward progression rather than as being broken up and rearranged. This is due to the fact that existing means moving forward in time since we can't physically experience it any other way, although we can experience time differently through memories and such.

  2. I was on that same line of thinking when I was reading that essay. Moments of confusion then moments of my mind just feeling blown! Im glad you put that quote in at the end of the essay, that line tripped me up.

  3. i often wonder how it could be possible that time is not constant, everything else we can perceive is, at least at the level of matter. matter can neither be created or destroyed but simply converted into energy and back, so how can time function differently? i have this theory that time is as constant as a pool of water, it swirls an eddies in response to thermal changes but there's never any more or less of it, i think that what we experience is our little swirl or eddy, we're that thermal energy dispersing out into an otherwise still pond and we reach the end of our lives when that heats been entirely converted into motion.

  4. I agree with a couple confusing lines, but more so, I thought she kind of overused examples. How many do we need to understand her point? Overall I thought it was a helpful article, but I think there was a lot of extraneous material.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.