The objector asks whether a single unit of ten and the ten as a whole must then be called “not other,” even though counting and predicating properties of them differ.
If part and whole are inseparable in certain respects yet conceptually distinct, why define all otherness solely by separability? The challenge exposes limits in an overly simple test.
An analogy establishes only the feature shared by its two cases. The properties of numbered collections or composite bodies cannot all be transferred to the divine essence and attributes.