>>12964280By your argument nobody could understand a book, it is too long. Perhaps that is true about you but it is not generally true.
More fundamentally, you are missing the point that concepts are not just labels (and that we will run out of labels) it is that concepts are classes that stand for all members of the class. The concept "man" stands for all men that exist now, in the past and the future. We don't need to name them to study them as class members. Moreover, all 7.5B people on the Earth exist and (presumably) have a name if we need to distinguish them individually. Some names are duplicated yet we can still identify them with qualifiers, such as John Smith of New York City, NY, USA without any problem.
Finally, as you admit, your example is ridiculous because you ignore specialization and the division of labor. No single person can comprehend the total of all human knowledge but by demanding that you are asking for one consciousness to be omniscient which is not how consciousness works. This is why we have doctors, lawyers, scientists, astronomers, cooks and truck drivers who understand subsets of the total and that knowledge is available through them if needed for the non-doctors, non-lawyers, etc.
