Concerning holistic definitions

Concerning holistic definitions

On a tangent to the ‘quality of water’ thread, I’d like to ask if we are defining things correctly…

If you draw a line and then ask, what is this line made of, you will find out what it is made of but wont have defined what the line is. Effectively defining what a thing is by its composition is perhaps a fallacy. We can for example take all the same components of a thing e.g. all the cells in our body, and rearrange them to make something different. Equally we could make a copy of them and make a second you or generally a second [ad infinitum] version of a given thing, but that is not the same as the thing we began with.

The line is A, what it is composed of is B. one does not define the other, metaphorically the holistic entity [you, water, colour, chair, fire, etc] is akin to a wall or walls, where what that is made of is akin to the room those walls are part of. When we define a thing by the contents of a thing, we are moving right past the thing and onto another thing!

the contents [inside the room] are not the same as what contains them. a container and the contained are not the same.

?

You’re confusing yourself too much …

When it was said 4000 years ago that “nobody steps in the same river twice”

This is generally true.

It is ALSO true that the river has a name, and it definitely was stepped in twice !!

It has a permanence over time

I can see both things are true about the river, and that the contradiction is merely one of perspectives rather than an actual duality, yes.

is an empty room full, or not a room but a block. lol

The fact that we speak of A means that we already know what A is. However, when we ask “what is A?” we are not asking what is A in the literal sense of the word. We are asking what is associated with A. Usually, this means what is analogous to A. Also, we’re usually asking for a specific analogue, not any kind of analogue. In other words, we are asking which element of some presumed set of elements is most similar to A.

Amorphos

I believe it is more of a derivation - I have the same problem with zero and infinity. For me though it is kind of a madness - so I am told.

To fill the container and displace the container with the contained is to know the contained and the container as one self contained principle.

I hope I make any sense. Lols.

[-o<

I believe we make ourselves.

With what God gave us of course.