Individuality

As we saw from the last class, defining a concept can prove to be a cumbersome task and that there is no concrete definition of the word. I think this is because the word is, in and of its self, a concept. How do you define a word when its self is the very definition is that word? The concept of a concept is so subjective that, as we saw in class, it means something different to each person. A concept is also defined by the context in which you are using it. I think that, generally speaking, a concept is a thought or idea that can be taken from a given situation and manipulated to fit any other situation in life. I think that concepts are what we use to define all other things we know, this is perhaps why it is so difficult to define.

With this said how do we address the question of the validity of a concept? As with the question of “who came first, the chicken or the egg?” how do we come to a conclusion? Since the idea of a concept is so subjective, I think that either argument of the given question can be deemed correct. Although neither argument may never be deemed valid by the values and practices of science, in the world of philosophy, these arguments would be greeted with an open door. I think this question addresses the concept of creation but I do not think that the idea of a concept can be used to derive a true and concrete answer to the question at hand.

In my discussion group we talked a lot about differences and similarities and how each is viewed in terms of community. The word we came up with in conjunction with this discussion was individuality. The concept of individuality can be looked at differently depending on its context. One person might see individuality as all of the qualities, and characteristics that make up a personality combined with the individual experiences of a person. It can also be looked at as how a given person differs from the rest of the population.

Block talks about the idea of social capital which he has come to define as the quality of relationships between and the cohesion that exists among a communities citizens. This got me thinking about the vast assortment of social groups in a given city. In every city there is a lavish upper-class, and more humble middle-class, and the ever suffering lower-class. Although all of these people reside in the same city there are clear distinctions between their classes. We would think that money is the only thing that separates these people, but I think it is much more then that. It starts with money but how much money people do or do not have causes them to live a particular way which in turn creates a different culture and way of life for each group.

This train of thought led me to wonder, what defines a community? Does location, such as a city, define what makes up a community or is it the culture, way of life, or even socio-economic status of people? With this said, should building a “community” merge these different groups together or should it focus on achieving a sense of cohesiveness within these smaller groups?