🚀 go-pugleaf

bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
: In article <1992Sep30.073018.13232@nuscc.nus.sg> matmcinn@nuscc.nus.sg (Mcinnes B T (Dr)) writes:
: )
: )I am holding in my hand a baloney sandwich. I hereby declare that this
: )is an instance of a clock. Now I note that as the baloney sandwich
: )decreases, so does my hunger. Since time is what a clock measures, I
: )deduce that: Time is hunger.
: )
: )In short, this definition of time is a load of baloney. Time is NOT what
: )you measure with a clock. Time is the length of timelike worldlines. Its
: )definition has nothing to do with the way you happen to measure it, whic
: )h is a mere technological bagatelle.
: 
: I don't agree.  Once you've defined a clock (and baloney isn't a clock -
: saying baloney is a clock is a bunch of baloney!) you've also defined time.
: The difference is clocks are (more) concrete than an abstract concept such
: as time, and generally much easier to talk about, at least with serious
: people of reasonably good will.

I am a serious person with a vast store of good will. But you know that
baloney is not a clock because you know that it doesn't measure time.
That's because you know that time exists independently of devices used
to measure it. It's about time [so to speak] to drive a stake [or is
that steak?] through the heart of operationalism. .