Ok I see what you're saying and I am going to get a little bit more specific and a little less philosophical and a little more obvious.

So what I want to say now is: If you're going to forget an event of the past in the future then the person will perceive the event as an instant.

does that make sense?

This post was edited by tinhajj on Mar 8 2011 11:07pm

Yes

Yes

kind of i guess

as in if you were telling someone about something they experienced but subsequently had the memory removed for whatever reason they could only appreciate it as an instantanious event rather than the timeline of memory you would have

Yeah that sounds good too.

We can perceive it now, even if it will be forgotten in the future. If some event in the future causes that person to have their memory of the event erased, that doesn't mean they didn't originally perceive it when it happened. It just means that the perception of that event is out of their mind. In their mind, they did not witness the event. That doesn't change the fact that they originally saw it happen.

No, and also your thread is stupid and you should stop bumping it.

Yeah right im coming to realize that now. I knew that made sense from the get go but I did not acknowledge it.



ty 4 the bump

makes perfect sence

I'm glad that you have now acknowledged that your original statement was stupid and incorrect.

And giving a thread a 'bump' when it's at the top of the first page is different than digging it up a few days later and bumping it twice because you're an attention whore who wants people to read his stupid and incorrect ideas for some reason.