A remarkable limiting case are crystals, which, as particular super-molecules standing under residual associational forces with true bonding nature, still effectively refer to individuals without however legitimately deserving this characterization. Although the bonding forces in crystals do formally more or less render them to be wholes, and thus individuals, there are nevertheless many uncertainties, for example their constitution out of purely identical or similar parts in a particularly strong mechanical fashion, from which [constitution] nothing qualitatively new will emerge, also not so by grinding, by melting, etc. In the same way as in "spiritual systems", "nations", "species", etc. one can view crystals as merely quasi-wholes.
Being not wholes at all (also not quasi-wholes), because standing entirely outside any definition of wholeness or individual, are conglomerates (of crystals and/or other things), natural (volcanic) and artificial glass, fluids, drops, clouds, and perhaps also celestial bodies individually or as planetary or galactic systems. It is, however, not excluded that from a different or more "elevated" point of view also planetary systems and galactic systems may be viewed as wholes by reason of their history of origin and of their being "bondinglike" conglomerations of parts. One may think of it as one likes. There is little possibility of false conclusions. If needed, one may also decide to take the concept of "individual" more generally and apply it under restriction to the just mentioned examples. But as to the methodical wholeness-concept, these examples must in all cases be excluded ["individual" may be taken in a broader and not too literal a sense, and then calling a galactic system "an individual", without, however, implying that such a system must then be a true whole.]. [In First Part of Website ("homepage") we have spoken much about wholeness and individuality in natural things.]
All in all, we may point to the fact that the concept of wholeness reaches from the hierarchical division of world-stages (levels) only down to molecules. In the form of organismic molecules the whole living manifold in an individual is, it is true, included, but metazoan cells, tissues, and organs are not system-wholes but [dependent] parts. And animal colonies, nations, and states are not wholes, but merely non-individual communities, that is, are something quite different.
The dominant significance of the existential self-function puts into perspective the meaning of the concept of "individuation in steps" (Example : molecules from atoms. Un-examples [and thus not involving steps], on the other hand, are : Organisms from organs, animal colonies from organisms.