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.
-
-
I don't know why, but it always seems to me that you're repeating the standard sociological trope that, since we theorise through languages, there's nothing outside of them you do know that physical models refer back to something outside of them, right?
-
No, that's not the point. You can't think of an objective reality if you don't have a systematic or formal intersubjective medium. Objectivity without intersubjectivity is just private experiences and thoughts.
- 1 more reply
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.