Metaphysics and the modern world

[Pondero]

Excellent post RyanL

 

[batteddy]

Phenomenalists would deny any underlying existence is knowable other than our perceptions of something and its effects on other things. Therefore, if there were no other things to effect, or to affect it, or to percieve it…it is impossible to speak of it “existing”.

No, most scientists are not phenomenalists…but I don’t think they have really thought of that argument either. They take the particle’s objective existence for granted.

But it’s existence isn’t granted. There are two schools of thought, and they choose one (it happens to be the right one) without considering the metaphysics involved.

Ask a scientist why they aren’t phenomenalist and they will have to, at least for a moment, consider metaphysics. Maybe then they will realize how important it is.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

I’m not sure that I agree with you there. Metaphysics, means meta (beyond) physics (nature) it is, therefore, the study of being or reality.

The basis, with my limited understanding of metaphysics, is that there is a base element that makes up all matter.

The ancient philosophers tried to define it as something like water, fire, etc. Some even said that it layed outside the physical matter present.

Could that element be God’s will? I think it is because God willed everything. If that is the case, then Metaphysics would be irrelevant to many since secularism rejects God. That would make Metaphysics and the Modern World at odds with each other.

 

[But_for_Grace]

FightingFat - in Metaphysics, Aristotle speaks of “first principles” that is what is underlying reality, and how we understand (if we are speaking of the first principles of knowledge) This is what Metaphysics is, the study of these first principles.

Read the book, it is a bit dry but a real eyeopener about how we understand the world around us

 

[Krebsbach]

OK. Some of the criticism aimed at Metaphysics in modernity would be stuff like there is no valid set of empirical observations nor a valid set of logical arguments, which could definitively prove metaphysical statements to be true or false. Hence, a metaphysical statement usually implies a belief about the world or about the universe, which may seem reasonable but is ultimately not empirically verifiable. That belief could be changed in a non-arbitrary way, based on experience or argument, yet there exists no evidence or argument so compelling that it could rationally force a change in that belief, in the sense of definitely proving it false.

Hey FF:

The logical positivists in particular deny metaphysical truth. IOW, they say that one cannot say anything true about everything or all being. But in saying so, they just did. So their position is self-refuting. A reasonable person concludes that it must be true that there are some metaphysical truths.

 

[Tony_McDougall]

This is a theology/ Philosophy thread:

How would you answer someone who claimed that in the modern world metaphysics is an outmoded philosophical notion?

All I tried to do when I registered was ask the question How would you answer someone who claimed that in the modern world metaphysics is an outmoded philosophical notion? I have no idea what it means and am looking for guidance as to where I can look