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.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @NegarestaniReza
part/whole distinctions can be good and useful, imo, if you just treat them conceptually and/or for the sake of explaining or describing particular things. but reifying those local distinctions into a whole ontology is seems bound to result in errors
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @Tarp_Ghost @NegarestaniReza
yes, let's let science 'carve nature at its joints,' or whatever. but let's not let that task keep us from talking in terms of parts and wholes
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Replying to @Tarp_Ghost
That was a great comment.
9:58 AM - 15 Feb 2020
0 replies
0 retweets
2 likes
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.