“My son is afraid of you. That’s why I came here instead of him.”
That this young woman is the mother of a boy who is about seven years old, that the boy is afraid of a young woman who was a shopkeeper at a candy store, and that the boy bought a bundle of candies at this store.
Nothing can be objectively proven. All that is certain is that in the evening a young woman appeared alone at the candy store and told the above story.
- How can the part and the whole be distinguished?
- How do you distinguish between the whole and the part? I wonder if we should rely only on ratios or quantitative magnitude relationships.
As a tendency, the parts are concrete, and the whole has an abstract color. As a practical treatment, therefore, we conceive the whole on the basis of the parts.
A woman who claims to be the mother of a boy who is not here has complained about the quantity of candy sold at the store, though she does not specify which candy.
The reason the store clerk never apologized for her complaint was that the woman who suddenly brought her complaint was a stranger in the area.
As evidence of suspicion, young women living around here have few chances to wear flashy skirts.
- What is the basic relationship between parts and wholes?
- This approach is surprisingly not terribly off the mark. Because the whole is a collection of similarities, and each part resembles the whole.
Therefore, qualitatively, there is no problem in thinking that the parts are equal to the whole.
“Where is your son now?”
His mother said he was at home.
Why isn’t the child here? This story isn’t over anytime soon.
World Cup 2022: Iranian players refused to sing national anthem before match with England… There have been nationwide protests in Iran for months over the country’s treatment of women, …
That’s all for today’s post. Thank you
Comments