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.
-
-
You say that, but your only argument ever is "but ... but ... but daddy told me!" Lee Smolin means I can ignore the ludicrous credential stamp you're always waving about.
-
... Darwinism at every level is just realism. I'd say "deal with it" but of course I know you won't.
- 20 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I can't do that in front of people ;)
End of conversation
-
-
-
I've experienced the same basic gnosis, but with dragons
-
The only thing immediately wrong with Land is that he treats Darwinism as some sort of game condition that a strategy can be calibrated to, in the same basic way that hermetics or gnostics thought you could achieve ascension by aligning your will with the will of the true God.
- 5 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.