>>11333507Am I supposed to view society as something external to myself? If so, then suppose society is comprised of all the people around me, excluding myself. For you, however, society includes all the people around you, excluding, correspondingly, yourself. Suppose we were neighbors or co-workers so that our social circles would largely intersect. However, my view of society would include you, excluding myself, while your would include yourself, excluding me. Henceforth, bringing "society" as a topic of conversation we would be talking about different things simply due to the fact you would be able to observe me as a part of a society (while I would only be able to guess) in your understanding of the word, while I would be able to observe you as a part of a society (while you would only be able to guess) in my understanding of the word. In other words, we would be discussing markedly different things denoted by the same word. How could we ever reach any degree of mutual understanding under those conditions? Doesn't that thought experiment discredit the very possibility of "society" being a valid conversational topic?
