What is an object? Recently I tried to come up with a definition of it. It's not yet perfect, but here's what I have so far: an object is a region of space whose potential effects only become more difficult to understand when you subdivide it.

The effects of throwing a rock at someone are relatively easy to describe. The effects of throwing two halves of a rock simultaneously and perfectly fused together at that same trajectory is much more difficult to describe. In the second case you have to start describing the interactions between the rocks, whereas if you look at the rock as a whole, you would realize that those interactions can be mostly simplified away.

Same thing with a person. A person's body is covered with skin, which makes for a really good cutoff point between what counts as them and what doesn't count as them. I know some people try to say that their true identity is their brain, or even just the conscious and intelligent part of their brain, but once you start trying to separate a person like that, you end up with a much larger and more complicated surface area for interactions to occur on. Me personally, I like to say that I'm all of me. It's much simpler that way, even if it means I have to take responsibility for subconscious and reflexive actions.

#philosophy

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Utilitarian western philosophy vs holistic eastern philosophy

I don't know if the term "holistic" makes sense here. Instead of the whole having properties that the individual components don't have, my principle is based on the idea that the whole will actually have far fewer properties than the individual components do. The properties cancel out in a sense. There's far less to learn about an object by looking at it as a whole; it's just that what remains has more practical use.

And Utilitarianism is a philosophy advocating for the maximization of moral utility, which isn't what I'm doing.