So, haven't journaled a whole heck of a lot recently.
I've just been pondering the linear and non-linear qualities of time.
One bit especially has been nagging me since this evening when I saw a theatrical production at my university...
I was talking to my friend, and we were discussing four year-olds.
Well, he asked me, "Are you a four year-old, Hannah?"
And that got me thinking, "You know, actually I am still four years old. At least part of me is. I mean, it's in my history, therefore it happened, therefore it is still part of my being, correct? So, in fact, I am still four years old."
Time isn't linear. I keep trying to figure out ways to illustrate this theory. To me, time is a spiral or a coil. It doesn't go in a straight line, it overlaps and builds on itself. Neither does the beginning of a person's time disappear, it still exists, but no longer exists physically, therefore it doesn't logically exist for other people, but for one person it does.
If that makes any sense...
Each human being has their own history, their own time structure. Time is relative, yes, but I believe it is even relative down to the very core of an individual. Yes, we have 60 seconds in a minute, 60 minutes in an hour, 23.25 (to be technically correct) hours in the day, etc. but those are only unifying strictures, very complex and clever strictures by which humans decide to pace their lives. DECIDE is the major key here.
There is always the argument of what separates us from the other birds and beasts of the world.
First of all, physically, nothing really separates us. Two legs doesn't make us superior, it only makes us more superior in our own environment. Try having a swimming competition with a fish... humans aren't going to win. But, they'll win a walking competition any day.
Trying to tout physical characteristics as superior to other animals is ridiculous.
Some say it's the brain.
I'm sorry, but a species that does some of the dumb things we've done hardly has bragging rights.
Third, humans apparently possess a "soul" or a conscience that other animals don't have. What defines a soul? And besides, there are plenty of humans that believe not all humans have souls. And conscience? A conscience we choose to ignore?
This brings me to my conclusion: what defines us from other animals: if humans must seek a way to define themselves, which in itself is a rather vain and self-conscious act... probably the most self-conscious act any species could committ, then the action of self-definition, or at least the search for a self-definition is probably THE defining characteristic of the human race. Not to mention self-consciousness. Of course, there are people in the world who do not attempt to identify or define themselves, and there are plenty of people in the world who are not self-conscious in the least. However, these people have not met "society" or, although I hate the term, the "modern world". Which also brings into light a problem about most theorist and philosophers is they take their world they live in (I live in modern America, for example), and they assume that their view of the "world" is correct. But what world is that? Is it reality for other people? NO! Everyone should be their own philosopher, because everyone's world is different. My world is not the same as someone from France, or someone from Australia. There will be similarities, but I cannot assume that my view of the world is correct based on my VERY limited view of the "world".
People are always concerned about the rest of the "world". The rest of what world? What rest of the world ACTUALLY comes into contact with us? I ponder this... Yes, we are all connected, but the irrational fear and paranoia people experience about the "real world" is ridiculous. There is no such thing as the "real world". We are all in the "real world", it's not some separate intentity that is mysterious and dangerous. If anything, the "real world" is simply knowledge and novelty. It's things that one has never been exposed to... terrible sentence, please ignore the grammar... but that doesn't make it any more REAL than the current life and world of the individual, it only makes it different.
Anyway...
This is all very post-modernism theoretical speak, but the funny thing about postmodernism is the fact that although it is, to me, anyway, a theory meant to explain and define the "post-modern" age in which we live (whatever that means...), it fails to do so by being completely open to interpretation and definition.
Which brings me back to the human race: the attempt to identify and define ourselves is the most defining characteristic of the human race, or at least the human race I've run into,
and
an individual's perception of time and space is completely singular, but strongly influenced by societal strictures and customs.
Time is a custom, not a given.
And it all comes down to the one. We should all be our own philosphers.
Speaking of time, sleeping time is upon me, and I wonder... what would it be like to live in a world with no clocks?
