(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	dragonfangirl 2007-02-04 12:51 pm UTC (link)
	That... really kind of depends on how you define 'society.' (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	tangentialone 2007-02-04 10:12 pm UTC (link)
	It could have been "community". :O (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	luthe 2007-02-04 11:52 pm UTC (link)
	twitches urge to define 'community' rising will to live falling Can't you tell I'm a Cities major? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	tangentialone 2007-02-05 01:38 am UTC (link)
	It needs defining beyond "a bunch of people living together with a common set of rules"? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

dragonfangirl
2007-02-05 03:06 am UTC (link)

Sadly, it does. For example, these "rules" you talk about. Do they have to be explicit rules (e.g, a written code of laws) semi-explicit (an oral code of laws, enforced by an individual or set of individuals delegated that power) semi-implicit (an oral code of laws, enforced not by designated individuals but by social pressure or by whichever individual is closest at hand when the rule is broken,) or implicit (a code of rules understood and enforced by social pressure, but never specifically defined?)

As you go down that list, you could argue that all of these apply to human communities, or societies, at various levels of developments; but they apply to some animal groups, too.

"First, let's define our terms" arguments can stretch on ad infinitum without ever even beginning the debate. Quod est demonstratum.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	tangentialone 2007-02-05 03:14 am UTC (link)
	Oh, I see what you're saying. I don't know what definition was being used in this case, though; we didn't go into it in depth. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -