Hello all. I am starting this thread "inspired" by Paddoboy's resort to 'common sense' as an argument for why 'time' must exist in this commendable and fascinating thread: What is "time". (See Post 76) I searched (by title only) for the term 'common sense' just now and saw that it's meaning is taken for granted by our good scientifically minded members. Dictionary.com defines the word: - independent of specialized knowledge! Interesting! Unusually for Dictionary.com, a separate 'British Dictionary' meaning is given as well: Fair enough, and rather similar to the earlier definition, but without that 'specialized knowledge' provisio. Hence even more is taken for granted, I think. I also had a look at Wikipedia. Not because it's such a font, but to get us all on the same page, so to speak. What's interesting here, please correct me if I am mistaken, is that 'common sense' is also rather a term taken for granted with no precisely clear definition. The first line of the Wiki article: reminds me of the 'what is time' debate again in that those who say time is a real thing seem not to be able to get that there is more to the world (the universe) than human perception of it. So can we, working in harmony as always, come up with a better, less presumtuous definition of the term 'common sense'? Let's have a go, shall we?