• JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      24 hours ago

      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.

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          22 hours ago

          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.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Not objective in the sense that aliens would come to the same definition for what is and isn’t a planet. Compare that to something like what the elements are.