Can anyone explain how to prove time to a presentist?
Say you have a wise guy who says that time doesn’t exist. Whenever you demonstrate change, the presentist goes, “What are you talking about?”
If you make an appeal to pragmatism, the presentist simply dismisses your conception of time as impractical because a presentist lives in the moment.
I’m stuck at this point. What do you do? Short of enduring humiliation by simply walking away, I’m not sure what else is an option.
This is especially humiliating when a presentist is more powerful than you and behaving corruptly, or has been allowed to weasel into an organization in advance of demonstrating ulterior motives.
The fact that he can say that sentence shows that there is a past and future time for him. When he says ‘what’, it can only make sense if he anticipates being able to say the next word ‘are’ at a future time. Similarly the word ‘are’ only makes sense to him and you because of the prior words.
Without time, there can be no communication.
I have never heard of a presentist. Except for fairly advanced dementia sufferers. Time doesn’t literally exist any more than length or height does. Its not the same as the other three dimensions but it’s a dimension. And it’s just as arbitrary with respect to other measurements we make.
FC’s recommendation should work. In fact, anyone who walks around calling himself a presentist should probably be struck in the face, just on general priciples.
I love the ongoing hints about your real life experiences. Mysterious, intriguing and then also missing.
That said. You can’t prove stuff to people who refuse to listen, believe, focus on, be open…period. People can be completely impervious. I mean, even to torture. You could get them to say they believed, with torture, but to get them to really believe…?
A possible way to embarrass them: (note: possible!)
Wait until they refer to the past or future and point this out. And when you point it out, speak as if you are a presentist. Always be a presentist when you ‘correct’ them. ‘Tomorrow, what’s that? Tsk. Tsk.’ ‘What you said to me? Come on, there is only what one is saying and I am talking not you.’ And so on.
Be a better presentist than they are. Be a presentist with a rule for their wrist, an angry librarian of a presentist. If whoever this is is in contact with you, works with you, depends on you, collaborates with you, whatever…the past will be necessary for them. Potentially they can manage without the future, but the past, forget about it.
If you buy something from them, don’t pay. That thing is yours. What the fuck is this talk of him having given your something. You have it, clearly. And then, of course, the moment he has finished challenging you, his challege no longer exists.
This person can have no expectations that you WILL do what you SAID IN THE PAST you would do.
Fuck with the presentist by being the presentist. This may not change his or her mind, but it might be fun.
The presentist is a coworker who constantly sucks up and does what’s required in the moment. He doesn’t think ahead on purpose, and deliberately forces everyone else on the team to assume the risk of things going wrong by being short-term minded.
When we complain about him, he just behaves nicely, says he doesn’t understand what’s wrong, and says he’s just following management’s orders.
Management likes him and agrees with him.
Also, he really likes talking about politics on the job, and doesn’t see a problem with the government confiscating what he calls “dysfunctional investments”. He doesn’t believe investors should be entitled to having peace of mind in deciding the rhythm that their investments operate. They should have a plan in mind, and run with it.
Management agrees with him on that too even though the company we work for has a track record of success from taking time in thinking before it acts.
Management sees him as a problem solver because he makes the current problem go away. The fact that he may be creating two problems in the future is ignored. Anyways, he’ll solve those problems when they present themselves.
He’s not a problem solver. He’s just a troublemaker. When something goes wrong, he sits back and relaxes or disappears, leaving the problem for everyone else to solve. If it’s not solved, he simply approaches management in asking how he was supposed to know that something would go wrong, or that something people are asking him to do isn’t his responsibility.
He’s really passive-aggressive. On one hand, he wants to compartmentalize responsibility. On the other hand, he wants the right to meddle in everyone else’s business, saying they’re being difficult if they don’t grant him flexibility.
Management agrees with him one way or another. He’s their favorite because he’s a yes-man suck-up.
But wouldn't an organizational man like that be able to have a role in this company because it is what the management wants? Isn't this type of a person rather stereotypical with specific functions? So if one wants to keep his job, he would have to deal with a situation like this with political correctness.
Wouldn’t it be difficult to go through layers of the organization where the chain of command of management have to also be involved with the short sightedness of such irresponsible behavior.
I think the problem as presented paints an oblique picture. The person trying to explain time, since whoever does this needs to understand the political affiliations and favoritisms that go on. Otherwise the question is one dimensional, and begs itself with a sort of shrug of the shoulders implying a “So, what?”
And how are “dysfunctional investments” related to this ?
I presume everybody has phones witb cameras or audio recording abilities. Record him through camera and audio, then present the evidence to your superiors after making duplicates, in case evidence gets " lost". Some one on the top most likely is not aware of his antics and disruption. One person is not as valuable as a happy hard working team.
OK, thanks for the specifics. I think this will make it easier to get good solutions, though likely not from me. Not really my field, so to speak. First off. Convincing him is probably nto the issue. It’s working for him and probably only solutions that make it not work for him will affect him. If I take your description as a good full summary, this means a couple of things 1) management is poor or at least has a big blind spot and 2) he does not have other redeeming, in the business sense, qualities. IOW there is not something he does especially well or at least well that makes management like him. They are partially blind to the unfair patterns he raises and fall for his appearance. I’ll just spit out some options: Ask management if workers could document the work they do for a couple of weeks. Make up some delegation of tasks analysis excuse or whatever you think might make them happy - an efficiency analysis, for example. Perhaps it would make it clearer what everyone is doing and not doing.
In meetings ask worker X - the presentist - how it is coming with task Y, one that should be one of his tasks. Ask for a timetable on something. Be nice about this. Find someone to ask for whom the information would be relevent to their responsibilities.
IOW try in as many ways as possible to shine a spotlight on what he does and doesn’t do.
approaching him directly, if you think there is any chance, should be done as concretely as possible.
You, X, did not do these three things, so I was forced to stay late on friday. Be calm and nice. Repeat this often and with as many willing workers. Document everything with dates and times and make a general file on the issue.
OK, thanks for the specifics. I think this will make it easier to get good solutions, though likely not from me. Not really my field, so to speak. First off. Convincing him is probably nto the issue. It’s working for him and probably only solutions that make it not work for him will affect him. If I take your description as a good full summary, this means a couple of things 1) management is poor or at least has a big blind spot and 2) he does not have other redeeming, in the business sense, qualities. IOW there is not something he does especially well or at least well that makes management like him. They are partially blind to the unfair patterns he raises and fall for his appearance. I’ll just spit out some options: Ask management if workers could document the work they do for a couple of weeks. Make up some delegation of tasks analysis excuse or whatever you think might make them happy - an efficiency analysis, for example. Perhaps it would make it clearer what everyone is doing and not doing.
In meetings ask worker X - the presentist - how it is coming with task Y, one that should be one of his tasks. Ask for a timetable on something. Be nice about this. Find someone to ask for whom the information would be relevent to their responsibilities.
IOW try in as many ways as possible to shine a spotlight on what he does and doesn’t do.
approaching him directly, if you think there is any chance, should be done as concretely as possible.
You, X, did not do these three things, so I was forced to stay late on friday. Be calm and nice. Repeat this often and with as many willing workers. Document everything with dates and times and make a general file on the issue.
Well, your question is funny. Presentist believe in time. Not sure how you get that they don’t believe in time. They just don’t believe in the time you talk about because there is no evidence for it. There is no evidence that the past exists, without assuming it to begin with, since you only can tell by the present. there is no evidence that the future exists. So the problem would appear to be that those who deny presentism have the issue, they have no evidence for it without assuming their position to begin with. Presentis doesn’t have to assume the present, it is there by experience.