I don’t understand the point you;re making here. Can you spell it out for me in more detail? Thanks.
My point is simply that it is better for each facet of a person if all the facets agree to unify with each other more, to the point where the person is fully unified and never in conflict with itself.
...this glosses over the concept of the individual.
This misses the mark, I think. Here’s a mutation:
“It is in interest of each and every cell to unify (coordinate) more with other cells, so this glosses over the concept of the organism.”
The coordination of cells is what allows us to speak of an organism as a whole. I won’t go so far as to declare that co-ordination of agents justifies the concept of the individual, but I do think the idea expressed in the parent is more wrong than right.
It is in interest of each and every agent to unify (coordinate) more with other agents, so this glosses over the concept of the individual.
I don’t understand the point you;re making here. Can you spell it out for me in more detail? Thanks.
My point is simply that it is better for each facet of a person if all the facets agree to unify with each other more, to the point where the person is fully unified and never in conflict with itself.
This misses the mark, I think. Here’s a mutation:
“It is in interest of each and every cell to unify (coordinate) more with other cells, so this glosses over the concept of the organism.”
The coordination of cells is what allows us to speak of an organism as a whole. I won’t go so far as to declare that co-ordination of agents justifies the concept of the individual, but I do think the idea expressed in the parent is more wrong than right.