Abstract

But in both these doctrines there is confusion between the temporal process and time itself, a confusion common enough but by no means permissible. For the process of change is not time, though it is what "takes time." It is sensible to ask whether it occurs slowly or quickly, but it makes no sense to ask whether time elapses more or less swiftly. We can consider how long a series of changes takes to occur but not how long a period of time takes to elapse. Time itself does not take time. Our common expressions about the movement of time and its relative velocity are illegitimate and refer only to the number of distinguishable events in a series or the degree of our interest in them, so that we say time "passes" quickly when what occurs is pleasant and interesting, or when exciting events follow each other in quick succession. We say that it passes slowly when little happens which is of any importance to us, or when we are tense and expectant, over-eager for the occurrence of some anticipated climax. These are descriptions of changes in objects or in ourselves which may occur quickly or slowly, they are not descriptions of time.