food had been hallowed, the attendees at the Society of Philosophers were ready to march up to the buffet table and eagerly partake of their fair share. Here, among theist and agnostic thinkers from all parts of the globe, opportunist philosophical arguments and debates would begin to take shape. Amidst the clank of utensil on plate after everyone had been dished up their food, tête-à-tête hastily crooked back to idealistic talk of space and time, the veridicality of credence in God, Darwinian point of view from malevolence, and whether or not so and so will as a final point stop working from training relevant to the particular time frame.. Somewhere off in a corner an apprentice participated a heavy-eyed piece of music on a majestic piano. At one table, Peter Forrest hailing from Australia resumed a topic near and dear to his heart: the disambiguation of time. “The transcendentalist doesn’t in fact get higher,” he asserted while holding his hand out flat and unhurriedly raising it up to impersonate the yogi’s feat. “Instead,” Forrest unremitting, “he loses the differentiation connecting the typical means of access of time and the submissive sequential order in which the flow of time seems to slow to a crawl.” A graduate student next to him who had been carefully listening frowned. Forrest seemed energized by this skepticism and his grin spread wider on his face while his brown tangled hair bounced wildly. Clearly, Forrest was happiest when the subject gravitated toward A- and B-theories of time and whether or not time passes in discrete units or was rather like Plato’s “moving image of eternity.”
Subsequently, all and sundry had earnestly frenzied the baked salmon and cheesecake, Paul K. Moser, Professor of Philosophy at Loyola