Well, it seems to me that one of the most important questions to be asked with respect to "What is Time" is "Is it Real". This tends to lead directly to discussions of Ontology and Epistemology.
I think this quote from a previous post illustrates that pretty well.
Quote:
|
Among prominent philosophers, there are two distinct viewpoints on time. One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence. Sir Isaac Newton subscribed to this realist view, and hence it is sometimes referred to as Newtonian time.[4][5] The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of "container" that events and objects "move through", nor to any entity that "flows", but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz[6] and Immanuel Kant,[7][8] holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable.
|
I don't see why it's off topic to try and understand the philosophical basis of the definition of time DD has given, and to contrast that view with opposing philosophical points of view.
But if you think it's off topic, I have no objections to splitting it off to another thread...
