|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 26, 2021 15:26:15 GMT
Unlike Heidegger's and Harman's concept, mine is based on metaphor: any object has four sides as a tree has root tips, a root, a trunk, and branches.
The root tips and the branches are plural; the root and the trunk are single. The tips and the root together are origin, and the trunk with the branches are projection. The formers reflect or copy (in a wide sense) the latters.
Usually we used to call individual what necessary needs to has something, that some others don't have. An individual object has something unique or atypical the others lacks. If this is the essence theory, then an individual might be different while the others are typical, or there are contexts which allow an individual thing to reveal its individuality. In general, each object regardless of its state can be presented as an individual.
According to my thought this metaphysical structure can be seen in different structures, for instance: a (social) individuum, and a society (itself). Given any object has those four sides, each object has as plural so singular sides. What are those singular and plural sides? - They are inner and outer functions of an object.
To reveal an individual character of an object one has to present its singular and plural sides, in its positive way, and in its negative way. The positive way is rather a blind way that allows an individual to, for example, states axioms or postulate something; the negative one is to put some critics about its ways. At the same time, the negative inner function won't make outside till the positive way is closed.
In the result, on a surface, we can claim that plagiarism, copying, shareness, etc are necessary processes which allow a human (a more complex object, or a sum of certain objects) to make his way to individuality. And those unpopular and reprehensible techniques is more or less presented in complex objects. So, to find a way to individuality or personality a human comes through some phases, ones of which are that to copy (the outer plural), to reflex (the inner single), to doubt (the inner plural), and to create (the outer single).
That's why social institutions like schools, colleges, and universities allow their students to be the same at the first phase, while further and further its members (studying ones) reveal its individual qualities. And not only such social institutions is functioning like that: each society at first makes its members to be typical (or, at least the societies don't judge too much similarities among its members), and after a while it makes its members to care about its individualities, its personalities.
|
|
Triangle
Full Member
Posts: 356
Likes: 134
|
Post by Triangle on Jun 4, 2021 18:25:52 GMT
Individuality isn't a metaphysical concept, sorry! haha
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 4, 2021 18:31:34 GMT
Individuality isn't a metaphysical concept, sorry! haha What about unites or monos? Surely, an individuum as a social unit doesn't belong to M, while the same meaning in it is the one or the unit. The M is a big area. Many different things are there =)
|
|
Triangle
Full Member
Posts: 356
Likes: 134
|
Post by Triangle on Jun 4, 2021 18:40:15 GMT
Individuality isn't a metaphysical concept, sorry! haha What about unites or monos? Surely, an individuum as a social unit doesn't belong to M, while the same meaning in it is the one or the unit. The M is a big area. Many different things are there =) Unites maybe a teleogical concept. Monos is a philosophical school concept, a kind of elaboration, subtle elaboration of certain philosophical ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jun 4, 2021 18:45:57 GMT
What about unites or monos? Surely, an individuum as a social unit doesn't belong to M, while the same meaning in it is the one or the unit. The M is a big area. Many different things are there =) Unites maybe a teleogical concept. Monos is a philosophical school concept, a kind of elaboration, subtle elaboration of certain philosophical ideas. I know that wasn't a good move of mine to use individuality so freely, like it was a metaphysical concept. It's just a bad habit of mine, a bad manner. Indeed, I was considered as individuality the form of separation of elementary particles, if 'a particle' is not necessary a physical element; ' a thing', not a physical element.
|
|
Triangle
Full Member
Posts: 356
Likes: 134
|
Post by Triangle on Jun 4, 2021 19:36:12 GMT
Unites maybe a teleogical concept. Monos is a philosophical school concept, a kind of elaboration, subtle elaboration of certain philosophical ideas. I know that wasn't a good move of mine to use individuality so freely, like it was a metaphysical concept. It's just a bad habit of mine, a bad manner. Indeed, I was considered as individuality the form of separation of elementary particles, if 'a particle' is not necessary a physical element; ' a thing', not a physical element. Ok, you're trying a relation. It's possible.
|
|