(March 29, 2013 at 2:21 pm)Tex Wrote: But we all use "2" and "3". Different systems is meaningless to my argument. I don't care if its 3 liters or 3 gallons, I care about 3. If I look at 3 containers, each 1 liter of gasoline (or petrol, whatever you'd like), I see 3 containers. Now, only get the 3. I don't want the containers, I just want the 3. "Three containers?" No, just 3. Not only are we perceiving containers, but we're perceiving what the group has that is not physical, quantity. If I remove a container from the group, the quantity has changed.
The different systems do matter because they do not weigh the same things.
A gallon is not a liter.
cultures made different systems uf messuring which messure different quanteties.
basics such as 1 being 1 or 2 being 2 dont change, but the diversity of the concepts and the differences in what people accept to be a unit is something unignoreable because it shows the difference in messuring and therefor shows how different cultures have differently influenced messuring systems.
1 is 1 and 2 is 2 not because a soul. almoust every living thing can figure that out but maybe not name it, as I mentioned before and what you ignored because it challenged your point and you dont want to leave disneyland.
Quote:However, this group is artificial. I made 3 containers and the group is in my mind. But it isn't always, which is my atom example. I did not create the atom (duh), but the atom has numerical requirements in order for it to retain identity. These are not in our head. These are in reality.
aaaaaaaaaaand?! is there any point you were making with that?!
We observe things and categorise these, something that isnt limited to our species.
Even leaf cutter ants can categorise between the different plants they need to harvest.
Quote:That statement isn't an argument.
it`s not a statement it`s gibberish
