Zeit und Geschichte Time and History - Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein ...

36
Perception of the World in the Contemporary Epoch: Time Experience - Natalia Bukovskaya
incidental. On the one hand, it means multiplication of the
absolute, and on the other, “dispersion” of time, its
decentralization. Interruption, fragmentation of time context
is outlined. The absolute, ruthless, linear time is contrasted
to the relative, flexible and nonlinear one. In painting this
new image of time is expressed by Salvador Dali’s “soft”
watch. Correlation of the time-clock with the instability of
memory is one of the greatest ideas. It was suggested by
Dali, and later it keeps on appearing in modern reflection
of various sciences, from theory of information to neurophysiology.
The thesis seems to be obvious, though it has
not been introduced for a long time. It is impossible to
even talk about time without memory.
In science at the beginning of the 20 th century there
appear new metaphors of time (trains and maps), chosen
by Einstein and Poincarè, which were not only mental
experiments, but the reflections of modern world technologies.
The relative time by Einstein and Poincarè
expressed the collision of two chronometries of the
European civilization.[2] But the science does not stop at
it. In the 20th century there appears the “rediscovery of
time” in the synergetic model of time in physics.
Irreversibility was recognized as an essential characteristics
of the world, there was the reorientation from “the
world of trajectories” to “the world of processes”, from
existence to formation. [5] Instead of the purpose of
existence and formation contraposition, there appears the
aim at correlation of these two aspects of reality. Our
epoch, the epoch of accelerating development, is pierced
with the arrow of time. According to Prigogine “the arrow of
time is associated with the transition from the present to
the future; it is because of the present containing no future
that we make this transition from the present into the
future” [6.p.346]. Here it is necessary to mention that as
there is always an essentially implied beginning and end of
the transition, the transition itself is achieved at a certain
period of time and is characterized by a certain state of
transitivity; all that predetermines the existence of
transitional time. Transitivity is ambiguous. On the one
hand, the depth of the transition, according to Jaspers,
“introduces the highest clarity of being and truth”, that is
why “the greatest spiritual works appear in transitional
periods on the border of different epochs”. But, on the
other hand, “turning of the transition into a vivid stable
duration eliminates perception sharpness alongside with
time perception” [8. pp.251-252]. Annoying stability of
transitivity expresses itself in the superficiality and unreality
of being.
Let us consider the metaphor of an arrow. Two
elements appear in the arrow. One element is the
direction, expressed in two ends. These ends are precisely
definite. There appear a point and the other end of the
arrow, without their unity it is impossible to represent an
arrow. Not getting deep into the essence of these
interpretations, we shall only point out, that inside this
metaphor there appears quite another sense of the
physical understanding of time after Prigogine, or, to be
more exact, after he changed the notion of cause. The
arrow of time does not any longer show the direction
between two past moments, as in classical knowledge. In
order to create a simple transition of the process there,
one had to establish its boundary conditions. To be more
exact, one had to measure the process in two points of its
history. It means that former points simply show the
current of all. This is the position of Laplace. Nowadays we
cannot say so. The lottery of bifurcational cases moves
“the arrow” into the future. The point of the arrow is still
indefinitely directed. The target is understood in another
sense, not as a dot, but as an attractor. This is a great
revolution, the introduction of the heuristic status of the
future.
As a result of the acceleration of social development
dynamics there is an increase not only in the amount of
innovations and time capacity but also in our existence in
transitivity, instability, which intensifies our strive for
stability, our conservative mood. Modern conservatism
aims at compensating stability absence but not at
hampering development. It is a way of thinking and
behavior that emerges as a reaction to acceleration
seizing all spheres of life and activity. It has a universal
cultural and structural character, thus being different from
the traditional social political conservatism. As “in the fast,
constantly accelerating speed of the civilization there is no
past and no future, no way to eternity” [1.pg.169], the
necessity of the way to it causes structural conservatism
which first of all becomes apparent in turning to classics
[4.p.106]. Turning to classics as to the way of interpretation
and realization of your time acquires greater importance in
connection with the increasing gap between temporariness
and timelessness. But only their ,unity gives man a chance
to find his time and consequently his being. According to
Gadamer “the task is to learn to percept this timelessness
in connection with time, for they essentially interact” [2.
p.167].
The idea of conservation at the end of the 20 th
century expresses the idea of stability, but not in the sense
of stagnation, but mainly in the sense of conscious selfregulation,
the realization of stability and instability. The
indefinite future, aggravated by the acute ecological
situation, makes one interpret the problem of mankind
preservation in terms of self-restriction, self-catching, not in
the meaning of asceticism or suspension of some
parameters, for example, of population (“ecological
pessimism”), but in the meaning of safe development precautions.
In the 20 th century there appears the
understanding of stability as being fragile and precious,
and there arises the problem of its acquisition in the
changing world. Existentialism with its tragic realization of
finiteness and fragility of existence in its essence contradicts
the total unreflective acceleration, which destroys the
true existence. The crisis of identity and instability, caused
by the accelerating development, brings forth the
reanimation and actualization of the “church time”.
A dramatic coexistence of enthusiasm for speed
(striving for the future) and fear of it, fear of the future,
which is increased by the feeling of the loss of not only the
past and present but also of the future swiftly turning into
the past, determines the contradictory character of the
perception of the world in the contemporary epoch.
Nervousness, impassivity, dynamics go alongside with
inner devastation, confusion and the feeling of being
restless and abandoned. The problem of the way of finding
your own time becomes one of the central problems of the
present transitional epoch. It is transformed into the
problem of historical self-identification, of finding your own
time, which means finding your own being and your own
God. That is why it is not by chance that there can be
observed an intensification of reflectivity in the culture of
the 20 th century, which penetrates all its spheres. Hence
turning to your past (comprehending the past) and the
future (projecting the future) appears a condition for selfactualization,
realization of the responsibility to the history
for your time, and consequently it becomes a way of
historic self-realization. Thus, gaining responsibility is the
best condition for gaining your time.