you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 7 months ago (1 child)

There is no objective criteria for what a planet is and isn't. Like a lot of things in nature, things just exist, and as humans we categorize them.

You're the second person to ignore the sentence immediately following that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Because that sentence doesn't really make sense. "Criteria" is a human concept. Nature doesn't do "criteria", nor "objective" for that matter. So, yes, there's no "natural criteria" for when something is X or Y, we, humans, make those criteria. Doesn't matter if it's in relation to animals, plants, or planets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    So you're saying things just exist, and as humans we categorize them? Because that's what I said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    The idea of a "category" is inherently human. Just like "objective" and "criteria".

    Which means there is objective criteria for what is categorised as a planet - it's whatever we, humans, define them to be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments