Thanks for sharing your thoughts.Federica wrote: ↑Tue Jun 27, 2023 9:00 pm
Luke, I think the nature of time that emerges from an anthroposophical, or more generally an esoteric, approach to reality is different from the one appearing to lie in the background of the quoted text.
In the quoted text it is suggested that time can be experienced as space-time, as non-linear, subjective, variable in its passing, depending on various factors. However, the frame of reference, the grid against which the concept of time itself is apprehended seems to be the same as that of linear time. It’s as if they are saying: time is not representable as a straight line on a Cartesian plane, it’s more like a curve, interacting with various parameters that can influence the shape of the curve, so things can happen earlier or later than expected according to a linear model, and two events can even intersect, and the linear flow of time can be ‘messed up’. But this is all still happening on the same Cartesian plane, and still in reference and contrast to linear time. There is no lifting the eyes from the standard ground idea of what the nature of time is. There is no orthogonal intuition to break the pattern of intellectual looking at it "from the side".
Basically what they are really saying is: true, experienced time is not a linear phenomenon, it’s more like a certain function of linear time. It says: we might know (as in “Einstein's time”) or not know (as in “clairvoyant time”) the exact parameters of the function (“it cannot be dated”) but it’s still sequential. In other words, the flow of time is imagined as curved, not linear, but time is still seen as an observable outer phenomenon that can be represented and understood as sequential. This means that time is still seen as space. It’s seen as a repetition of comparable instances, that our intellect only can imagine “out there” as deployed in (mental) space, so that the character of repetition/sequence can be appreciated.
In short, we are still within a materialistic, intellectual appreciation of time that little has to do with clairvoyance (at least this is my impression based on the quoted text, I have not read further at the link). As a brief attempt to recall what’s been brilliantly illustrated in other threads here, like the one containing the Time-Consciousness Spectrum - From an esoteric perspective, time is experienced as inscribed within the quality and maturity of our spiritual activity itself. It is the name and measure of our level of awakening to, and conscious partaking in, spiritual reality at large, in interplay with the becoming of everything/everyone else. Therefore, the experience of expansion in meaning and understanding could be called time integration (we bring within consciousness deeper and deeper experience-based, participative knowledge of spiritual reality).
Regarding the quoted text, the broader context of the chapter was to try to show the changes in scientific understanding (at least from the West in recent centuries) and how those changes correspond to changes in our self-definitions, which perhaps is a valuable thing to consider because it seems to connect with the evolution of culture and thinking.
I think the point was that linear time is limited to the earthly sphere, and the author brought up a few times the point that these concepts are still steeped in dualism. And I recall the author made a point somewhere else in the book that all models are just metaphors for reality, not reality itself. I think overall she was just trying to make the subject of the book more accessible to the average person, because the main focus of the book was on holistic healing rather than about scientific models, and it is just unavoidable that most people wouldn't understand these subjects without some sensory-intellectual concepts to provide some sort of anchor... those types of concepts are useful as a starting point. Even Rudolf Steiner's Anthroposophy is tough to understand initially without starting with sense concepts, I recall in Theosophy he tried to relate spiritual concepts to what we can know from just the earthly sphere, I'm sure he gave examples of how reincarnation is hinted through knowledge we can gather from the earthly sphere. I haven't read all of Theosophy yet though, so correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not particularly advanced on my spiritual path either so I am just trying to explain what I understand so far.
Do you think the theory of relativity is significant? As in, what it tells us about our spiritual activity? That is what I was trying to bring up when I made the post, sorry it wasn't clear. I hope this question isn't too vague. I wonder if relativity has been discussed before on this forum, any idea?
What do you think of the direction modern material science is moving? Because it seems like a lot of modern science is slowly heading towards holistic knowledge (aka spiritual science), or will be forced to go in that direction at some point. I've seen modern science ideas with some similarity to what people talk about on this forum. I recall a post about that actually, here is a link viewtopic.php?t=892 I think someone shared the link with me in another post on here but I'm not sure.