Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Apr 13 2022 03:38pm)
Lol k. Pretty pathetic that you would lie about this. We actually ended the last conversation with you saying nature creates objective categories, and then declined to define what an objective category is and let Sioux define it for you in a way that didn't help your argument. Remember? We talked about it over discord and Sioux agreed with me that the only true objective category that exists would be one in which every individual fundamental particle was sorted into its own individual category.
Nature creates objects, not categories. We create categories to make the world easier to think about.
We can infinitely divide state's of matter if we want to. There's no inherent reason to not create a new category for every 10 psi of pressure change if gasses and there's no inherent reason beyond convenience to separate gasses and liquids. It's just not as convenient. I know, I was a chemist Remember? I know how the metrics we use to derive these things are calculated. Even parts of a cell aren't that clean cut. Endosomes and lysosomes bleed into each other sometimes and can be hard AF to quantify as a result. We just separate them for the laymen because getting the full nuance of the compartments is pretty difficult without being an expert.
There are even places where simple categories like states of matter break down. Supercritical fluids exist, as do high energy particle soups that aren't plasma. We just assign things as states of matter to make them easy to think about, but once you get to be an expert in a field you stop using clean categories because you understand the nuance.
what percentage of biological males that nature creates have a penis?