TIME How we screwed up our relationship with the universe, and how to get it back Part 2

By Dr Eric Zabiegalski and Per Brogaard Berggren

Last month we began our discussion about time, the universe, and our relationship with each and we made the argument that our relationship with the universe was skewed. And furthermore, at least where the world was concerned, probably in shambles (a bad state of affairs). This has to do in part with the attention given to the concept of time as we have created it and our ignoring and avoidance in recognizing the ways in which the universe and the natural world express it. Bottom line, a little universal empathy could go a long way here. This month Per and I continue our discussion, considering what is likely real and unreal regarding time, what time is, and likely isn’t as it relates to space, and the phenomena of change, and how we fit in this picture. We hope you’ll join us. Your insights, and questions are welcome and helpful.

Flying spaghetti monsters

You may proudly declare that you don’t believe in fantastical beasts like flying spaghetti monsters, but if you’ve swallowed humanity’s concept of time, you’ve been caught, hook, line, and sinker. Literally, from the moment were born, the ticking of the secondhand begins and dictates every aspect of our lives. A big problem with this is that for one thing “time” as we perceive and use it, is a human construct, a concept largely fabricated by us, and to our image and purpose. We intuit time as such as being useful, and practical, but this is not always the way the universe sees it. If the universe could talk (if it had consciousness and an opinion), it would likely tell us we should be paying attention to more important things and not naval gazing in wonder at our mechanistic creations, like timepieces. Specifically, we should focus on the things that time wraps itself around, and otherwise forget about everything else. Things like each other, experiences, objects, and changes in nature. Instead, we obey, chase, steal, negotiate, even weaponize time, and use repetitive mechanical and electronic instruments in the validation of our existence. The result? We end up hurrying to empty destinations, missing all the scenery and experiences along the way, and finding nothing and no one there to greet us at the end. Time as we have crafted it has turned into one large frustrating, distracting, and confounding meaningless mess. Instead, Let’s focus on a larger picture as we move through time and space.  

The importance

There is a quote attributed to Albert Einstein which most likely originated with W.B. Cameron:

“It would be nice if all of the data which sociologists require could be enumerated because then we could run them through IBM machines and draw charts as the economists do. However, not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.”

To give the measurement culture in which we live a good jab, one need only think of concepts such as love, trust, friendship, and other similar aspects of life to realize the truth in the last part of this quote, there are things in life more important than the enumerable.  And as to the idea that happiness comes from that which is countable, “It would be nice if…”, Per and I express relief that life is not this way as we contend this isn’t reality. As human beings, a mechanized, modeled, decontextualized, abstract world would only satisfy one side of man’s brain, rendering us calculable (and flawed) machines and not the wonderfully unpredictable, cosmic creatures we are. The point here is that we are not imperfect machines; instead, we are perfectly human.

The issue

We could quietly claim that time is not an issue, it is there anyway, and will “pass” indifferent to human life. If we view time in the terms of the universe it is beyond comprehension, unfathomable. Our own little, miniscule lifetime on Earth is insignificant compared to that of the universe. As we mentioned last month, anxious urgency enters our psyche in the uniquely human phenomenon of reflection. To recall the past, considering such notions as so little time to “create”, and so many things yet to gain “control” of. Perhaps time is only relevant as a yardstick moving forward for synchronization and should only be coupled with present events, used as a comparative meaningfulness indicator for the self and with the self and others. 

All work and no play…

Just like the body, the brain needs rest to recuperate. A couple of years ago, the Queen of Denmark said in a New Year’s speech “try, occasionally, to do something useless because you simply like it.” Perhaps putting reflection back on the agenda in the proper context and in the proper ways will be an important re-discovery and future breakthrough for humanity. Not as a reflection of the past, a recall of memory not tethered to anything relevant happening now. But instead as a real-time reflection slowing down the now and informing the present, and the future. What was the Queen of Denmark prescribing with her advice? Simple goofing-off? what was she cautioning against? In a 2020 HBR article entitled Organizations that move fast really do break things, they attested that constantly moving fast actually does break things, and that this is not necessarily a good thing. So maybe time is not the issue, but instead what we do with it that is, and the level of event load we try to squeeze into it poses the real challenges, and dangers. In the words of former Uber CEO Ryan Graves:

“We should have taken more time to reflect on our mistakes and make changes together. There always seem to be another goal, another target, another business, or city to launch”

Even Uber is now embracing a simple assessment, and aim: “We do the right thing. Period.

The true nature of time

So if time isn’t what we think it is then what is it? Its simple definition is the continued sequence of existence and events that occurs in an apparently irreversible succession from the past, through the present, into the future. It’s funny but I don’t see any mention of clocks here. Clocks are great, don’t get me wrong. These synchronous marvels give us exacting repeating, representations for time which are unchanging and moving forward into the future and can serve as representations of the past and the present as well, in a way they provide a mantle from which we can hang moments of experience. Physicists also define time by progression and use time for measurement as the progression of events, though an important distinction is that these defined measurements don’t necessarily measure human activity. Moreso the objects of their measurement are often for the purpose of understanding the universe and the world around us for the betterment of not just humanity, but all life, the world, and the universe. The scrutiny and measurement of time otherwise and everywhere else is primarily about people, for people. Psychologist Larry G Maguire says this about using time in the ways we do:

“Time, as an objective container for the universe doesn’t exist. It has no independent reality outside of my perception. Instead, time is a function of our relationship with the physical world and although we might rely on it in our everyday lives, it doesn’t exist outside us. Like a ruler or a weighing scale, clocks offer us a symbol of reality, not reality itself. Time changes and shifts depending on both our physical and psychological state and we influence those states, therefore, we create time. As Alfred North Whitehead cautioned, we must be wary our concepts of reality are not substituted for reality itself.”

He’s right. But this caution may be too late for humanity. Regardless of this reality, time is sold to us from birth with sobering seriousness as a precious commodity and something which is very real. Society has taught us the idea that we live along an invisible (time) line from birth to death and that it holds invaluable currency which we must spend and save wisely. For me, time, as we’ve created it, seems more like a useful tool than a way of life or a mantra. One which we can pick up, use to get things done in a physical and relational world, and then set down. One which we can shelve or embrace, cast away, and discard, when we're finished with it or when it is otherwise non- applicable , of interest, or useful to us. Like a ruler or other measuring device, the clock and calendar are tools to gauge our position in relation to other things, more important things, and to one another. In other words time serves us, we do not serve time. 

Is time real?

We may live in the now, but we also live with (and in) the past and for (and in) the future all at once. In the words of a yoga instructor friend, the mind continually ping-pong’s back and forth from the present, to the past, to the future, and back again. The reasons why we do this are likely evolutionary and driven by fundamental survival. Perhaps subconsciously, if we can correctly interpret the past, we can properly execute the present, and accurately predict the future. Metaphysician and philosopher John McTaggart argued for the unreality of time stating time is not temporal at all but instead one of a series of sensations followed in one of two possible patterns which, when examined cancel each other out, disproving one another. McTaggart’s famous A-& B-series paradox is a good example for reflection. What he said was that one of two series explaining time, either A: representing a pattern made of past, present, or future, or “B”, time ordering events by occurrence relational to one another, is actually how time is, it’s either one (A), or the other (B). The problem (the paradox) as McTaggart saw it was that each of these series canceled the another out, disproving the other. If that is true and neither of these scenarios is valid in explaining time he surmised, then time, therefore, can’t exist.  

“Either/or”, and “both/and”

Is it possible both of McTaggart’s series could be right depending on given context – sometimes a “thing” can be the same but different at the same time (as in the case of light observed as waves and also as particles), depending upon how we “measure”, and look at them? In this line of thinking both/and is also either/or. In short, when you disregard the context, the context is indifferent, and when you pay attention to it, it is significant. There is a danger of analysis in life here in picking a side and stating both cannot exist simultaneously. One side of the human brain oversimplifies and compartmentalizes things in order to comprehend them and in so doing disregards Important things, subtle things, making our comprehension perhaps more comfortable, but also less complete in a big-picture sense. This is the perspective of a left hemisphere of the brain world view and is an all-to-common and growing narrative within modern life. Perhaps we feel as though we lack time to reflect or suspend judgement, for deeper meaning and fuller understanding of a more complete reality. But it’s the contention of these authors that only both views, left and right hemisphere coalesced together, and then shared with other’s views creating a new (third) picture and making room for either/or and both/and will ever be the only right answer in life. As Per said to me recently in surmising the very curious predicament of man “Every single second is uniform for all and at the same time unique to the experiencer". Check in with us next month as we explore the joining of time and space and consider human thought as a form of time itself.  

Dr. Zabiegalski and Per Brogaard Berggren are available to talk to your organization or venue about ambidexterity research or speak informatively and eloquently about organizational culture, organizational leadership, strategy, learning, complexity, IT, business neuroscience, creativity, mindfulness, talent management, personal success, emotional intelligence, Action Learning, and storytelling. Contact Eric, or Per on LinkedIn about a talk, keynote presentation, or workshop today!