Talk:Holon (philosophy)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles about the idea of systems. If you would like to help, you can edit this article or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid importance within Systems. | |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | |
"a holon is a historical event that makes other historical events inevitable."
Maybe this falls in to the class holon but this is not what a holon is. As the word holon means part-whole any structure that exhibits a part-whole characteristic falls into the class holon. I think someone should remove the above part from the article.
I might be a good idea to include an example of such a historical event. This wil make the subject more conprehensible (at least it would for me). Sparkie
Corrected Panda's false edit. atoms are lower than molecules since molecules are made up of atoms. - check SES. --82.35.193.80 17:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Holarchy is not hierarchy
I simply want to question the statement in the article saying that holarchy is a hierarchy - "This hierarchy of holons is called a holarchy". I don't find that Holarchies necessarily are arborescent hierarchical structures. I think it is absolutely possible to perceive holonarchy as a rhizome (philosophy) or non-hierarchical panarchy.
--Xact 22:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] David Boje
[edit] Reference to Hierarchy of Needs
I think I understand why one would use Maslow's HoN as an example for this. There are a variety of smaller imperatives making the totality of a person's needs, so the analogy of memes making up a memeplex fits in that respect. At first I was just making a grammar/spelling change (The sentence read "An simple characterisation...", I changed it to "A simple..."). But that made me think about the wording more thoroughly.
The specific instance given ('eat' and 'have friends') doesn't seem to work. Since those would both be memes, there isn't a 'memeplex' in the example. This lead me to try and think of something to correspond with 'memeplex', at which point I realized that using the HoN as an example in this case is a far reaching analogy. To me, it implies that there is a corresponding overarching need that human beings have beyond satisfying those expressed in the HoN. I wanted to remove the reference entirely at that point, since it seems unnecessary and potentially misleading. I decided against making a large change like that without first making an attempt to explain why and see what other people thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.92.47.30 (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
____________________________________________________________________________
Popper is mentioned as the one who coined this word as a portmanteau word that comes from Greek Holos + the -on suffix as in neutr-on, prot-on, et.c. in order to mean an entity (whole, all, όλον) that derives from very small parts (suffix -on).
In my oppinion, as with most portmanteau words, this is nonsense.
However, the particular one is an UGLY bastardisation of a very significant philosophical term, "το όλον" ("to holon") which means absolutely and ONLY "the whole" and NOT "the part" or the "whole" and the "part".
DO NOT USE THIS WORD BECAUSE YOUR WORK MIGHT BE REDICULED. I've seen it in scientific journals, which I've classified in the round file (i.e. the bin) for this reason alone.
____________________________________________________________________________ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.218.182.153 (talk) 11:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
