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.
-
-
Yes, you said that in colloquial and philosophical speech they aren't, not in scientific. I was responding to that comment only. Since Aristotle's Categories on they would be termed entities. I'm not sure about colloquial speech, and don't think it's relevant in this context
-
Aristotle's definition is precisely what has become the colloquial version, or at least a watered down version of it. Nonetheless, this Aristotelian talk is precisely the kind of scholasticism that has no room in modern sciences.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
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.