Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.[/quote]
I cant, but at least I can show you an individual.
I have pictures and stuff.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What I really like is that Sloth understands that a “line” is not real because it is just a theoretical mathematical concept but he does not understand that a “group” is also nothing more than theoretical a mathematical concept.
A group can only exist because of the individual things contained in the group.[/quote]
And property only exists as a concept.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.[/quote]
I cant, but at least I can show you an individual.
I have pictures and stuff.
[/quote]
Cool, I have those too. I also have pictures of groups.
It’s no use arguing with Sloth. The Borg already got to him.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.[/quote]
I never claimed any of that. YOU claimed groups take physical action. Pics or it didn’t happen. I can show you pics of individuals doing all the things I’ve claimed. Your demands are arbitrary and nonsensical.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What I really like is that Sloth understands that a “line” is not real because it is just a theoretical mathematical concept but he does not understand that a “group” is also nothing more than theoretical a mathematical concept.
A group can only exist because of the individual things contained in the group.[/quote]
And property only exists as a concept.[/quote]
Hmmm…logical fallacy.
No, because I can show you real stuff I own. And I can also prevent you from taking it from me with my other property.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
It’s no use arguing with Sloth. The Borg already got to him.[/quote]
I’m beginning to think sloth is a little slow…
chuckle chuckle.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.[/quote]
I never claimed any of that. YOU claimed groups take physical action. Pics or it didn’t happen. I can show you pics of individuals doing all the things I’ve claimed. Your demands are arbitrary and nonsensical.[/quote]
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=skyscraper+construction+crew&FORM=BIFD#
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
What I really like is that Sloth understands that a “line” is not real because it is just a theoretical mathematical concept but he does not understand that a “group” is also nothing more than theoretical a mathematical concept.
A group can only exist because of the individual things contained in the group.[/quote]
And property only exists as a concept.[/quote]
Hmmm…logical fallacy.
No, because I can show you real stuff I own. And I can also prevent you from taking it from me with my other property.[/quote]
You can show me stuff and force. Property is a concept.
Sloth is absolutely right
groups do exists
they are concrete
the whole is greater than the sum of its part
if something is abstract here, it’s not sloth’s concept of the group, it’s your concept of the individual.
people do exists, but the autonomous atomistic individual you’re refering to is not only a social construct. it’s a mere fiction.
try to grow a baby without a group, you won’t get an individual, you will get a tragedy.
without the group, you would not even be able to speak and argue about your individual right. you would not have the language to do it.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.[/quote]
I never claimed any of that. YOU claimed groups take physical action. Pics or it didn’t happen. I can show you pics of individuals doing all the things I’ve claimed. Your demands are arbitrary and nonsensical.[/quote]
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=skyscraper+construction+crew&FORM=BIFD#[/quote]
So, where is the crew putting a bolt?
[quote]kamui wrote:
Sloth is absolutely right
groups do exists
they are concrete
the whole is greater than the sum of its part
if something is abstract here, it’s not sloth’s concept of the group, it’s your concept of the individual.
people do exists, but the autonomous atomistic individual you’re refering to is not only a social construct. it’s a mere fiction.
try to grow a baby without a group, you won’t get an individual, you will get a tragedy.
without the group, you would not even be able to speak and argue about your individual right. you would not have the language to do it.
[/quote]
And here I was thinking individuals invented language…
individuals may invent and/or change words and syntaxic rules, they didn’t invented language itself.
the emergence of a natural language is a collective and holistic process.
[quote]kamui wrote:
individuals may invent and/or change words and syntaxic rules, they didn’t invented language itself.
the emergence of a natural language is a collective and holistic process.
[/quote]
So it happens irrespective of the individual?
There are even literally languages invented by single individuals.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.[/quote]
I never claimed any of that. YOU claimed groups take physical action. Pics or it didn’t happen. I can show you pics of individuals doing all the things I’ve claimed. Your demands are arbitrary and nonsensical.[/quote]
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=skyscraper+construction+crew&FORM=BIFD#[/quote]
So, where is the crew putting a bolt? [/quote]
…you think those building are the work of an individual? Or, of atomistic individuals showing up and doing whatever struck their individual fancy? Those are the products of collective effort. I can show pictures of teams, crews, groups, and most importantly outputs–like a skyscraper for crying out loud–that isn’t the work of individual effort.
Property, and how property is distributed, is no less a concept. And no matter how it is distrubted there will always be at least the threat of force where consent is lacking, since there will never be unanimous consent. And since there isn’t unanimous consent in any system, private property makes “slaves” according to the “but I didn’t give consent to the formation and funding of a government” group.
[quote]kamui wrote:
Sloth is absolutely right
groups do exists
they are concrete
the whole is greater than the sum of its part
if something is abstract here, it’s not sloth’s concept of the group, it’s your concept of the individual.
people do exists, but the autonomous atomistic individual you’re refering to is not only a social construct. it’s a mere fiction.
try to grow a baby without a group, you won’t get an individual, you will get a tragedy.
without the group, you would not even be able to speak and argue about your individual right. you would not have the language to do it.
[/quote]
uummmm, no, wait, what?
Which group are you talking about? Can you show me please? I am a little slow.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now show me a picture of the one, atomistic-individual responsible for the entire knowledge found within Biology. Show me the picture of the one atomistic-individual responsible for orderly living among humanity.[/quote]
I never claimed any of that. YOU claimed groups take physical action. Pics or it didn’t happen. I can show you pics of individuals doing all the things I’ve claimed. Your demands are arbitrary and nonsensical.[/quote]
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=skyscraper+construction+crew&FORM=BIFD#[/quote]
So, where is the crew putting a bolt? [/quote]
…you think those building are the work of an individual? Or, of atomistic individuals showing up and doing whatever struck their individual fancy? Those are the products of collective effort. I can show pictures of teams, crews, groups, and most importantly outputs–like a skyscraper for crying out loud–that isn’t the work of individual effort.
Property, and how property is distributed, is no less a concept. And no matter how it is distrubted there will always be at least the threat of force where consent is lacking, since there will never be unanimous consent. And since there isn’t unanimous consent in any system, private property makes “slaves” according to the “but I didn’t give consent to the formation and funding of a government” group.[/quote]
“collective effort” is individuals making individual decisions and individual agreements with one another.
A group is an invented construct that adds no value of it’s own. period. By definition.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
A group is an invented construct that adds no value of it’s own. period. By definition.[/quote]
The word “group” is invented. But so is “individual.”
no.
again, you are thinking in term of arithmetics where you should be thinking in term of ensemble theory.
it’s not 1+1 = 2 here
it’s “A is part of B”
yes, groups (B) are composed of individuals. (A)
but no, groups (B) are not just the sum of the individuals (A) who composed it.
yes, things (language included) need individuals to be done.
but they are greater than the sum of the individual work done by these individuals.