From particular examples, general theories may emerge. These general theories depend on their particulars for support. When one particular no longer is valid, the general may lose its validity and cease to exist. Thus, particulars are necessary for the general to exist.

From the general, the particular gets meaning. Without generalities, all particulars are isolated, unconnected, and without a meaningful structure. The general unites particulars, and gives them a significance they would not have without the existence of the general.

When the general is attacked, particulars are brought forth that contradict the general. When the general attacks, it seeks to absorb as many particulars as possible. In argument, a man's general theory is comprimised by whoever provides examples that contradict it. An argument is best fortified by bringing in examples that verify it. The particular is used to either create or combat the general.

Though the general is all-encompassing, it needs particulars. Also, within each particular, the potential for the nature of that thing to emerge and become a new general theory exists. The ability to see, imagine, or promote the similarity between one particular and what appears to exist in all others is the beginning of the generalization process, the movement from precise to abstract. All generals were probably once particulars.

The question; could we live without generalities? is like asking whether we could live without meaningful particulars. In such a world, no explanation for things would be possible.