Monday, February 04, 2008
Linear Time and Society
A linear timeline cannot change the past (strictly philosophically-speaking). Going back to change the past, you will inevitably fail because of the paradox of killing your grandfather. So it would also mean that going to the future, you will also inevitably fail in changing the future. Which means your future is set, your actions are preset and your future predetermined.
In my opinion, it seems to make more sense if time branches into all available possibilities. For example, today, I either have the choice of going home, or going to rob a store. In the timeline, there are the two possibilities (and possibly even more possibilities) that branch off from our timeline. I have the choice of which act to follow. If I decide to go home, then I take that particular branch of the timeline. Then what follows will be further branches of future possible outcomes/decisions I can make. Or I can decide to rob a store. What follows will be a different series of decisions to be made than from the branch of merely going home, since robbing a store is a different branch of the timeline. So it allows the past to be changed, since there are now possibilities rather than being stuck with only one timeline. Mind you, travelling back in time may even produce new branches for the “past self.” However, I haven’t really figured out how travelling to the future works. Which branch do you end up going to, if there are so many branches of possibilities? Do you just end up in the branch which has the highest chance to occur?
So why do we perceive time as linear? Is it another cultural construct? It may be due to our conception of people. We tend to perceive people as having fixed personality traits. This is reflected in our justice system. People are punished for their bad deeds, and we perceive them as innately bad, has having personality traits that makes them commit crimes. Once found guilty, the crime follows them around in their “permanent record,” and they are stigmatized. The linear timeline reflects this ideal of crime and punishment. Because you have done a bad deed, you deserve be punished. This reduces the agency a person has, as his actions are controlled by his biology. This also reflects our faith on biology and science. It also allow us to look back on his history as being inevitable, as there is only one timeline, to which it would seem to be unchangeable.
A timeline with branches would not work so well in our society. It undermines science and biology, as it increases and emphasizes on human agency to choose their own course of actions. It goes against the notion of fixed personalities, as there is the possibility that your personality can turn out very different because it can be shaped by your experiences, rather than being born with it. Which leads to the idea of actions performed as due to context rather than personality traits. I had learned in another course that laws were originally created by the powerful to protect themselves and to control and subjugate the less powerful. If the context is emphasized rather than personality traits, then it leads to the understanding of actions due to responses to society. It can point out to social injustice and inequalities of society. Timeline with branches does not support the “blame the victim” scheme of our society, and I think it may be why our society views timeline as a singular, linear line.
Does anybody have anything to add or anything to refute? I am still exploring this idea, and I am not really sure if what I say even makes sense.
In my opinion, it seems to make more sense if time branches into all available possibilities. For example, today, I either have the choice of going home, or going to rob a store. In the timeline, there are the two possibilities (and possibly even more possibilities) that branch off from our timeline. I have the choice of which act to follow. If I decide to go home, then I take that particular branch of the timeline. Then what follows will be further branches of future possible outcomes/decisions I can make. Or I can decide to rob a store. What follows will be a different series of decisions to be made than from the branch of merely going home, since robbing a store is a different branch of the timeline. So it allows the past to be changed, since there are now possibilities rather than being stuck with only one timeline. Mind you, travelling back in time may even produce new branches for the “past self.” However, I haven’t really figured out how travelling to the future works. Which branch do you end up going to, if there are so many branches of possibilities? Do you just end up in the branch which has the highest chance to occur?
So why do we perceive time as linear? Is it another cultural construct? It may be due to our conception of people. We tend to perceive people as having fixed personality traits. This is reflected in our justice system. People are punished for their bad deeds, and we perceive them as innately bad, has having personality traits that makes them commit crimes. Once found guilty, the crime follows them around in their “permanent record,” and they are stigmatized. The linear timeline reflects this ideal of crime and punishment. Because you have done a bad deed, you deserve be punished. This reduces the agency a person has, as his actions are controlled by his biology. This also reflects our faith on biology and science. It also allow us to look back on his history as being inevitable, as there is only one timeline, to which it would seem to be unchangeable.
A timeline with branches would not work so well in our society. It undermines science and biology, as it increases and emphasizes on human agency to choose their own course of actions. It goes against the notion of fixed personalities, as there is the possibility that your personality can turn out very different because it can be shaped by your experiences, rather than being born with it. Which leads to the idea of actions performed as due to context rather than personality traits. I had learned in another course that laws were originally created by the powerful to protect themselves and to control and subjugate the less powerful. If the context is emphasized rather than personality traits, then it leads to the understanding of actions due to responses to society. It can point out to social injustice and inequalities of society. Timeline with branches does not support the “blame the victim” scheme of our society, and I think it may be why our society views timeline as a singular, linear line.
Does anybody have anything to add or anything to refute? I am still exploring this idea, and I am not really sure if what I say even makes sense.
# posted by Anonymous @ 7:37 PM 
