Consider the following two cases, A and B. In case A, a cube exists and, a few seconds later, a
sphere exists, exhibiting a sequence of disappearance and appearance. In case B, by contrast, a cube
and a sphere exist side by side. What distinguishes these two cases is the way in which the entities
involved—the cube and the sphere—are organized in time and space. In case A, the cube and the
sphere are temporally organized in such a way that they exhibit “dis/appearance”, whereas in
case B the…
Read moreConsider the following two cases, A and B. In case A, a cube exists and, a few seconds later, a
sphere exists, exhibiting a sequence of disappearance and appearance. In case B, by contrast, a cube
and a sphere exist side by side. What distinguishes these two cases is the way in which the entities
involved—the cube and the sphere—are organized in time and space. In case A, the cube and the
sphere are temporally organized in such a way that they exhibit “dis/appearance”, whereas in
case B they are spatially organized, and no such phenomenon occurs. The upshot is that temporal
organization is dynamic, while spatial organization is static: time involves passage, whereas space
does not. On this basis, temporal passage is defined as follows: dynamicity or “dis/appearance” of objects, which is a part of time but not of space.
But what is the nature of temporal passage?
