> On Dec 16, 2:36 pm, John Jones aol.com> wrote:

>> "It was ten years ago"
>> "A minute from now"
>> "Nano-seconds after the Big Bang"
>>
>> When statements like these are handed over to the scientist, or when
>> Joe Public wishes to parrot the scientist's beliefs by interpreting
>> such statements, an appeal is always made to "Time". Time is then
>> offered up as being quite distinct from the events it linearly orders.
>> "Ten years ago" is judged by consensus to be, not a material event,
>> but a point in time. We can do that because time is real. We rest
>> content with this social, traditional belief. Consensus is the only
>> proof we need that, like the consensus that prozac really can be good
>> for you, and that Maxine Carr really is evil, Time is necessarily real
>> because it orders events. Carried unanimously.
>>
>> A problem arises when we try to consider a start or end of Time.
>> Startings and endings are supposed to refer to points in time. So a ...