82. The Now, Motion, and Rest in Time

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

• The Indivisibility of the Now: The now is the common boundary between past and future, existing as an indivisible limit rather than as an extended temporal part
• Absence of Motion in the Now: Since the now is indivisible, no motion can occur within it; motion necessarily requires time
• Absence of Rest in the Now: Rest as privation of motion cannot occur in the now, since rest requires a before and after
• Divisibility of the Moving Thing: Whatever undergoes motion must itself be divisible
• The Imperfection of Motion: Motion barely exists ontologically because it is never fully present in the now

Key Arguments #

No Motion in the Now #

• If motion occurred in the indivisible now, faster and slower bodies could traverse different distances in the same time
• This would require the now to be divisible (to accommodate different distances)
• Since the now is indivisible, motion cannot occur in it
• Therefore, motion necessarily occurs in time, not in the now

Three Arguments Against Rest in the Now #

1. From the definition of rest as privation: Rest is defined as the absence of motion in something capable of moving. Since nothing is apt to move in the now, nothing can be at rest in the now.
2. From the identity of now in both times: If the same now existed in both times, something could simultaneously be in motion and at rest, which is impossible.
3. From before and after: Rest requires that something has itself and its parts in the same way now as before. The now has no before, so rest cannot occur in it.

Divisibility of the Moving Thing #

• A moving body must at some point be partly in its initial position and partly in its terminal position
• When entirely in the initial position, motion has not begun; when entirely in the terminal position, motion is complete
• Therefore, the moving thing must be divisible

Important Definitions #

The Now (nyn) #

• The indivisible limit of both past and future
• Has no extension or temporal duration
• The only thing that truly “is” in time; past and future are not
• Distinguished from the eternal now of God (unchanging and undivided)

Motion #

• Imperfect act: exists only in time, never fully present in any single now
• Past motion is no longer; future motion is not yet
• Only the present now exists, but no motion occurs in it
• “Motion hardly is” because it lacks full presence

Rest (in the strict sense) #

• Privation of motion: the absence of motion in something capable of moving
• Requires before and after to establish permanence
• Not applicable to God (who has no time) or to the now
• Distinguished from mere negation (e.g., chalk does not see, but is not blind)

Privation vs. Negation #

• Negation: Simple absence (e.g., chalk does not see)
• Privation: Absence of something that naturally should be present (e.g., blindness in a human)
• Unlimited (apeiron) when applied to God is negation, not privation; applied to a line it is privation

Examples & Illustrations #

The Fast and Slow Objects #

• In an indivisible now, if both a fast and slow object moved, the fast would traverse distance AB while the slow traverses distance AC
• This would require dividing the now into parts (one part for slow motion, another for fast motion)
• Since the now cannot be divided, both cannot move in it

The Woman’s Anger #

• Sequence of events: “She hit me” → “She’s angry with me” → “What made her angry?”
• We discover causes by working backward from effects, not by beginning with the cause
• Shows how knowledge begins with what is more known to us (effects), not with what is first in nature (causes)

The Road Journey #

• A road runs from Springfield to Boston
• One can begin a journey at any point on the road, not necessarily at Springfield
• Illustrates the distinction between the beginning of the thing itself and the beginning of one’s action or motion relative to it

Water, Hydrogen, Proton #

• Historical knowledge progresses: water → hydrogen → proton
• The proton (meaning “first”) is metaphysically first, but epistemologically last
• Shows the inverse relationship between metaphysical priority and epistemological priority

The Norwood Builder (Sherlock Holmes) #

• Criminal frames murder to appear to occur in a fire days earlier
• Holmes detects an inconsistency (the criminal adds one more detail to make it perfect)
• “He lacked the supreme gift of the artist, knowing when to stop”
• Illustrates that limit/boundary is perfection; the absence of limit is privation

Mozart and Titian #

• Examples of artists who know when to stop
• Contrasts with endless soap operas that lack a proper ending/limit
• Shows that a limit marks perfection and completion

Questions Addressed #

How can we know things if knowledge begins with effects, not causes? #

• We begin from what is more known to us (effects), not what is first in nature (causes)
• Knowledge proceeds through investigation of causes as we ask “why?” repeatedly
• God, as first cause, is the last thing known in philosophy

How can motion occur if there is no motion in the now? #

• Motion occurs in time, which is divisible and infinite
• Each now is a limit between temporal parts
• The moving thing extends through multiple successive nows
• The imperfection of motion reflects that it is never complete in any single now

Is God at rest or in motion? #

• God is neither at rest nor in motion in the senses discussed here
• God has no time (no before and after), so privative rest does not apply
• God’s unchangingness is a negation of limitation, not a privation of motion
• Similar to how chalk is not blind (negation) but does not see (mere negation)

What is the ontological status of motion? #

• Motion is an imperfect act with minimal reality
• Past motion no longer is; future motion is not yet
• Present motion does not occur in the indivisible now
• Therefore, motion “hardly is” - it has the least reality of actualities

Philosophical Implications #

• Modern thinking tends to privilege motion as the mark of reality and historicity as fundamental
• Academic culture valorizes motion (travel to conferences) over stationary contemplation
• However, understanding motion’s ontological imperfection corrects this modern bias
• Establishes that thinking (noesis) is superior to motion as a form of actuality