BW: This chapter is a messy jumble of ad-hoc commentary on a dozen topics, with no substantive point. Societies change, people move, there are wars, population and production rise and fall, gravity pulls, entropy pushes, etc., etc. I'll try to pick out some substantive statements, but they are mostly vague assemblies of jargon.
BW: It goes without saying that each human is a part of humanity. Every person who believes in causality agrees that all effects are caused by the (collisions of) matter in motion. Throughout the chapter, you make disparaging comments about "free will", as though it were obviously impossible and irrelevant. You never discuss the idea, nor even ask the obvious question "Free of what?" You simply assume that it's inconsistent with determinism or causality.
TSW: "While capitalists benefited ..."
BW: Specious rhetoric with no analysis, explanation, or discussion.
TSW: "From Hugh Miller to Robert Ringer, the message is pretty much the same: 'joining a group to accomplish any purpose is irrational.'"
BW: I don't know Hugh Miller (Christian Apologist?), but have read Robert Ringer (Atheist Sociologist), who says nothing of the sort.
TSW: "Social microcosms, like all classes, are whatever we define them to be."
BW: In other words, superficial distinctions among humans tell us nothing. Correct.
TSW: "Although the selection of univironmental boundaries, as always, is inherently subjective ..."
BW: Which means it has no relevance to any objective facts: it's purely arbitrary and subjective. Correct.
TSW: "Obviously, without a convergence of two or more microcosms, no new thing, no new microcosm can arise."
BW: If you're merely saying that different groups of people sometimes mix, that's obvious: humans migrate. If they don't mix, no new groups are formed ... by definition. However, this spatial fact is incidental and doesn't explain anything about convergence, competition, cooperation, or socialization.
TSW: "Convergence initially brings about competition: the struggle of microcosms for identical spatial positions."
BW: No two people can be in exactly the same place at exactly the same time, so I assume you're talking about groups of people "converging". But, you make no argument about any relationship between convergence and competition. Even in a totally isolated group of people, there is always "competition" for status, resources, and sexual companions. That doesn't change when two or more groups mix. Rarely does it have anything to do with occupying space.
Next: The Social Microcosm (Part 2 of 7)