Think, emergent properties within a hiearchy.
[quote]kamui wrote:
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 work done by these individuals.
[/quote]
Okay, show me a value added by a group no the act of an individual.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
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 work done by these individuals.
[/quote]
Okay, show me a value added by a group no the act of an individual.[/quote]
a skyscraper…
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[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.”
[/quote]
No. Absolutely not. Self is an inherent natural construct of a fully functional human. Humans are self aware. This is not invented.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
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 work done by these individuals.
[/quote]
Okay, show me a value added by a group no the act of an individual.[/quote]
a skyscraper…[/quote]
All done by individuals.
a fully functional human is the result of the collective effort of a group.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Self is an inherent natural construct of a fully functional human.[/quote]
And I suppose it took only one to produce this fully functional human.
[quote]kamui wrote:
a fully functional human is the result of the collective effort of a group. [/quote]
Lie. A human born wild with no human contact is self aware. To be human is to be self aware. You can not claim that is the product of a group.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Self is an inherent natural construct of a fully functional human.[/quote]
And I suppose it took only one to produce this fully functional human. [/quote]
oh god this is has been reduced to shear nonsense. Now societies make the babies?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
All done by individuals. entirely the exact product of the summation of the products of individuals with no added value from a group entity. You fail the question.[/quote]
The group working as a group moving iron, plus the group working as a group setting rivets, plus the group working as a group to oversee…
in which language does this “human born wild” express his self awareness (before dying from hunger) ?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
All done by individuals. entirely the exact product of the summation of the products of individuals with no added value from a group entity. You fail the question.[/quote]
The group working as a group moving iron, plus the group working as a group setting rivets, plus the group working as a group to oversee…[/quote]
all the exact summation of individual actions. 2+2=4. Where is the added value?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Self is an inherent natural construct of a fully functional human.[/quote]
And I suppose it took only one to produce this fully functional human. [/quote]
oh god this is has been reduced to shear nonsense. Now societies make the babies?[/quote]
A group does. Or, are we asexual? But, looking past that, societies make the people. But go ahead and reproduce asexually and then raise them around pimps, whores, and drug dealers.
[quote]kamui wrote:
in which language does this “human born wild” express his self awareness (before dying from hunger) ? [/quote]
language is not necessary to concept of self. that’s a terribly dumb assertion. The word individual expresses an existing concept of which the word is not necessary.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Self is an inherent natural construct of a fully functional human.[/quote]
And I suppose it took only one to produce this fully functional human. [/quote]
oh god this is has been reduced to shear nonsense. Now societies make the babies?[/quote]
A group does. Or, are we asexual? But, looking past that, societies make the people. But go ahead and reproduce asexually and then raise them around pimps, whores, and drug dealers. [/quote]
2 individuals can. The USA can’t get my wife pregnant. Further, the social interaction of humans (what society is) is not necessary to reproduction.
Not to mention prenatal and ongoing pediatric care, diapers, education, formula…etc.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
summation of individual actions[/quote]
Uh-oh!
self awareness requires intelligence, which require concepts, which requires language.
now, i suppose you can build a very broad concept of self awareness, which doesn’t require language.
but then boar and ants are self aware too.
and i suppose you won’t grant them property rights.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Not to mention prenatal and ongoing pediatric care, diapers, education, formula…etc.[/quote]
Oh you mean the individual doctor who takes care of her, or the individual that invented the diaper, or the individual who decided to become a teacher?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
summation of individual actions[/quote]
Uh-oh!