If George Wald can get away with referring to time as a hero, I hope I can get away with playing with the metaphor a little. Let's take a not entirely serious look at time as hero. Yes; it's another episode of the Grammarian detective.
Quotes and comments;
1. 'Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. Given so much time, the "impossible" becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles. [1.]
- In saying 'time is the hero' Wald admitted, despite himself, that the 'miracle of life' required intelligence and personhood (i.e. to turn inert matter into a living organism) Only human beings (persons) are heroes, neither inanimate matter or time can qualify. I think we can safely say that there are no heroes on a dead world.
Why might he have let the word hero slip? Was he thinking of Prometheus (I notice that atheists still love some myths.) If he was, that doesn't fit, because there were people around when Prometheus supposedly did his thing, there would have been no people around when our hero time brought life into being.
So why say hero? There were no bad guys to slay, no wrongs to right. Wasn't he admitting that it would take the miraculous; i.e. something myth-like for this to happen?
Isn't hero just another word for god when used in this fashion?
Time can't do anything of course; expecting time to accomplish anything is like digging a well with the idea of a shovel, or escaping from a jail cell with the idea of a hacksaw.
As I see it, time is just what we mean by motion; without motion there's no time. So; can motion accomplish miracles? Not that I've heard of.
Where does the word hero come from? It comes from mythology.
To say time is the hero is to bring mythology into the picture; it amounts to saying we need a mythological answer to our problem. (You no doubt remember that Plato would enlist myths to resolve unanswerable problems in cosmology or metaphysics... so this kind of thing has a long history.)
In mythology the hero is often (if not usually) of divine parentage or origin. To say 'time is the hero' is to say the answer must almost certainly be of divine origin. The hero often possesses divine gifts (supernatural gifts). We can see the fit, as it would almost certainly require divine gifts of some kind to turn a rock into a living organism, and then turn that proto-cell into a human being (i.e. a creature capable of inventing heroes; turning mere paper into a living
creature.)
A hero is usually someone favored by the gods. This allows him to pull off some of the superhuman stunts he becomes famous for. You can see why (in our scenario) he might need some divine favor. He didn't merely have to slay a dragon, he had to create one.
Heroes are known for risking their lives. I'm not sure this fits here, as there was no life. Can you risk your life when you're not alive?
I don't know of anyone who thinks time is alive. They might think time is a hero but I don't know of anyone who thinks time is alive. (What time would look like in this plot I don't know. Would it have a cape? I'm not sure.
I've looked hero up in the dictionary, but I don't see time listed as a representative. Funny. Is it possible Wald was wrong?
Heroes are known for their great strength, so perhaps it was the strength possessed by Time that did the trick. Perhaps it squeezed the life out of a stone or something.
A few heroes are known for their intellectual prowess, but I don't think Time qualifies.
Hero;
1. 'A real or mythical person of great bravery who carries out extraordinary deeds.
- the question we need to ask is this; was time a real hero or a mythical one? (Answer carefully; the fate of science may depend on your answer.)
Turning inert matter into a living organism (whether once or several times the oracles do not say) certainly qualifies as an extraordinary event. It was certainly out of the ordinary; as inert matter rarely comes together to create life forms.
A hero is sometimes a protaganist in a work of fiction. Yes; that might work... but where is the contest, and what is it about? In a dead world what is there to contend about? There won't be maidens for a long time to come. Who are there to contend over the maiden who isn't there?
The hero is sometimes the leader of a cause, but it's hard to see Time in this light isn't it? Why would life be a cause in a dead world? Who would there be to fight for this cause, and why would they enlist?
In modern terms we might refer to Time as the leading actor in a drama. We have to admit that since Gamow knighted Time as the great hero, it certainly has gained a lot of honors, and gained a lot of added power as well.
A hero is sometimes a mere mortal who gets raised to godhood after death. It's certainly true that Time has only recently been granted godhood, and given the power to accomplish miracles, and it's true that Time now sits with the gods on Olympus... but of course Time never was alive, so I don't know if this fits.
Summary;
Without an almost endless amount of time, evolution becomes an obvious miracle; but a miracle with no one to perform it.
In the words of someone more eloquent than myself;
'An important aspect of the standard evolutionary geological time table is the urgent necessity for countless millions of years to dilute the miracles of evolution and make them seem 'natural.' It is assumed that changes that are impossible or else miraculous when pinpointed in time can be rendered plausible and natural when blanketed with millions of years.' [2.]
Mike Johnson
Notes;
1. 'Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the "impossible" becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles.
2. The mythology of science - R.J. Rushdoony p.52
'An important aspect of the standard evolutionary geological time table is the urgent necessity for countless millions of years to dilute the miracles of evolution and make them seem 'natural.' It is assumed that changes that are impossible or else miraculous when pinpointed in time can be rendered plausible and natural when blanketed with millions of years.'
- This book (a brief review of evolutionary science circa 1965) is available online, and is well worth reading; especially for a comparison with the current scene. [Chalcedon]
- Rushdoony points out that if the supposed events of evolution took place over a short period of time (e.g. 6000 years, or even 60,000) they would have to be called miracles. For some reason people believe or accept the idea that if these miracles happen over millions of years they're not miracles. We're supposed to believe that 'time' makes all these miracles possible.
So what is this miracle maker time? Isn't it an immaterial force? Isn't it a mere abstraction? Is there such a 'thing' as time? Can time DO anything? Not that I can see. As far as I can see, time is just a name given to entropy. I think people confuse time with motion.
Let's be agreeable and assume time = motion. How can motion accomplish miracles? How motion can create life from non-life?
If you want a true picture of evolution, imagine a picture of a rock turning into a human being, all with no outside help. That's the kind of miracle we're talking about. (i.e. imagine it as an animated film)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
