Gary M W. - Jamaica, VT

FULL VERSION:There are no ends of time. Time is an act which exceeds itself by offering opportunity of action in response that is neither possible but for that opportunity nor limited to any predeterminations implicit in that act. The original act is no beginning, the response is no end. But that act, because it does not limit the response it is opportune to, cannot prejudice it. But because that response is not limited to that original act it cannot be in any sense conclusive of its worth. Time is the differing the act and response each offer the other. And yet, since each is, in itself, bereft of that differing, it is all too easy, and perhaps inevitable, to read time as the perfection of its origin or the achievement of its end. So divided, it is easy to suppose conservatism to be a reading of time in which any imperfection is lain at the feet of those who suffer from it, and progressivism to be a reading of time in which that imperfection is lain at the feet of those who best embody the original archetype. But, in truth, both archetype and teleology/eschatology are conservative commitments to exclude spontaneity from the world. More properly, progressivism is a commitment to the role of each act of being to be opportune to the response of time. That is, imperfections are opportunities for responsible change, not signs of a diminished capacity to participate in the changing time always really is.EDITED VERSION:Dividing time between origin and end, it is easy to suppose conservatism to be a reading of time in which any imperfection is lain at the feet of those who suffer from it, and progressivism as a reading of time in which that imperfection is lain at the feet of those who best embody the original archetype. But, in truth, both archetype and teleology/eschatology are conservative commitments to exclude spontaneity from the world. More properly, progressivism is a commitment to the role of each act of being to be opportune to the response of time.