A Critical Review of Plamen N. Nikolov's Reflection on the Essence of Time

Plamen N. Nikolov’s article Reflection on the Essence of Time (2024) seeks to revisit one of philosophy’s perennial problems—the definition and nature of time—through interdisciplinary reflection. The article argues that time, although an overall attribute of being, resists definition as a predicate and should instead be understood as derivative from the mind. While drawing upon Augustine, Kant, Bergson, and modern physics, Nikolov ultimately positions temporality as a phenomenon best explained through the immanent operations of consciousness rather than as an external, autonomous reality. This review undertakes a critical examination of Nikolov’s contribution and compares his conclusions with the philosophy of S. C. Sayles, particularly as developed in CHRONOS: The Logos-Centred Chronosophy (Volume One), KAIROS: The Logos-Centred Chronosophy (Volume Two), TIME AND TIMES: The Architecture of Time, The Veritas Confirmata series, and The Recovery of the Soul: The Informational Architecture of the Mind. Points of convergence are acknowledged, particularly the priority of mind over mechanistic accounts and the rejection of time as a mere physical metric. However, significant divergences emerge, as Sayles insists upon the ontological grounding of time in the Logos and the Information Field (IΔF), thereby safeguarding temporality from subjectivism and abstraction. The review concludes that while Nikolov’s study raises valuable questions, his framework risks collapsing into relativism unless anchored in a transcendental Logos-based ontology, as articulated in Sayles’ metaphysical chronosophy and metaphysical anthropology.