Anyone thinking wholes and parts are ontic categories is either a fraudester or a stupid philosopher (i.e. doubly fraudster). There is no such ontic categories. You construct new wholes to reveal the underlying fragments, you glue the fragments to uncover new wholes ad infinitum.
-
-
do you actually think that's an argument against the physics this piece bases itself on?
-
You mean that the core thesis of the piece is against the principles of modern physics / scientific theories?
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Here reza, have a bone to gnaw on: "ontic differentiation is not itself anything ontic."
-
What does that even mean?
- 13 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
You're saying the guy whose entire philosophical enterprise is bad faith arguments once argued in bad faith? Damn!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.