Mead again

Mead says clock time and calendar time is time only “in a manner of speaking.” He also argues that clock and calendar time is not “absolute” but relative to one’s frame of reference. True that, as my kids say: “Monday” spells gloom within the framework of a certain organization of the working week, and more specifically within the framework of a certain job.

But why should “relative” time be time only “in a manner of speaking”? Must something be “absolute” to be fully real? Mead lusts for an absolute time like Newton’s even though a lot of his project is anti-Newtonian. He relocates absolute time, but like Newton he reduces everything outside his absolute time to “relative” and “not-quite-time” time.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Notes on Anosmia

John Wilson

One morning several years ago, as my wife, Wendy, and I were having breakfast together, I had…

Empire of Unreality

Algis Valiunas

Shiva Naipaul (1945–1985) was the author of three novels and two books of mordant dispatches from places…

The Dreadful Christ of Pär Lagerkvist

Peter J. Leithart

It’s dangerous to meet a god,” says the disgraced Pythia in Pär Lagerkvist’s The Sibyl. Her observation…