(July 21, 2013 at 3:44 am)genkaus Wrote: Your unending stupidity is getting a bit tiring. You have given no new arguments but are simply parroting the same thing over and over again without even realizing that it does nothing to undermine the facts.It's funny how I'm the parrot. I get an insult and then you assert where you think you're right. Again.
So, let's keep going, shall we?
The pool, under white light, is blue. The water is not. A good example of whole not having attributes of its parts.
Bricks are short. Wall made of bricks is not. Another good example of whole not having attributes of its parts.
Salt not sharing the attributes of sodium or chlorine - another good example.
A machine made of unbreakable parts is breakable - another good example.
The 'whole is the same as its parts' only makes sense when the attribute in question is absolute. 'Small', 'tall', 'short', and 'large' are all matters of perspective. The brick thing makes no sense.
The argument also has no weight when the grouping of the composite parts does not affect the whole. Water is blue because its deep, an insescapable part of being in a lake. Sodium and chlorine also compromise their attributes in salt because of electron exchange. An uncaused universe made of caused things can't exist unless there is a reason for it to be.
If our unbreakable machine does not have its parts infallibly connected, these joints will become breakable and will break. Inertia is also a weak method of keeping machine parts together, because inertia can be broken.