Metaphysics

[haas mark]

I see there is another thread about metaphysics already, and I tried to follow it, but from what I read, there's no real explanation to my question: What is metaphysics?

I heard an explanation (of sorts) a while back, but don't remember. I knw that this is supposedly an entirely theoretical state, and I don't know much science, so I would rather there not be any formulas brought out unless necessary or with an explanation.

Second, I would like you to step into the possibilty that yes, metaphysics DOES exist, and what would things be like? What would the world really be like?

[Darth Wong]

I see there is another thread about metaphysics already, and I tried to follow it, but from what I read, there's no real explanation to my question: What is metaphysics?

I heard an explanation (of sorts) a while back, but don't remember. I knw that this is supposedly an entirely theoretical state, and I don't know much science, so I would rather there not be any formulas brought out unless necessary or with an explanation.

Second, I would like you to step into the possibilty that yes, metaphysics DOES exist, and what would things be like? What would the world really be like?

How can you ask anyone to accept metaphysics if you don't even know what it is?

[haas mark]

I see there is another thread about metaphysics already, and I tried to follow it, but from what I read, there's no real explanation to my question: What is metaphysics?

I heard an explanation (of sorts) a while back, but don't remember. I knw that this is supposedly an entirely theoretical state, and I don't know much science, so I would rather there not be any formulas brought out unless necessary or with an explanation.

Second, I would like you to step into the possibilty that yes, metaphysics DOES exist, and what would things be like? What would the world really be like?

How can you ask anyone to accept metaphysics if you don't even know what it is?

I am asking two questions here: what is it, and how would it affect things.

[Colonel Olrik]

verilon, there is not such a thing as metaphysics. The therm would mean something, for example, ocurrences, contrary to the laws of physics, and that does not exist.

As much as you cling to your ideas of spiritualism, the fact is, even if you are right, then your experiences are explained by physics. It only means that some particular branch of scientific knowledge is not quite yet understood

[The Dark]

Instead of merely blasting metaphysics, I will place some definitions up and allow people to make their own conclusions, rather than flame them for asking hypothetical questions.

The branch of philosophy that systematically investigates first causes and the nature of ultimate reality.

...the study of existence as such or, in Aristotle's words, of "being qua being" - the basic branch of philosophy.

...the branch of philosophy that has as its subject matter the nature of the world, or of reality, rather than the nature of our knowledge, or of our language, or of our sciences about the world.

[Colonel Olrik]

Instead of merely blasting metaphysics, I will place some definitions up and allow people to make their own conclusions, rather than flame them for asking hypothetical questions.

No one is being flamed. And it's really quite straightforward.

Meta: above

physics: the scientific description of the world.

So, it would mean the existance of something outside science and reality. That does not exist. Can you refute it?

The branch of philosophy that systematically investigates first causes and the nature of ultimate reality.

OK, it can be a branch of philosophy. But then the name is misleading, as it as nothing to do with physics.

...the study of existence as such or, in Aristotle's words, of "being qua being" - the basic branch of philosophy.

Again, nothing to do with physics. Only a really arrogant name to describe the activity of some philosophers discoursing about existence, the world, bla bla.

...the branch of philosophy that has as its subject matter the nature of the world, or of reality, rather than the nature of our knowledge, or of our language, or of our sciences about the world.

The study of the world must be made based on the physics laws. If not, it is useless.The word methaphysics wouldn't apply.

[haas mark]

verilon, there is not such a thing as metaphysics. The therm would mean something, for example, ocurrences, contrary to the laws of physics, and that does not exist.

Thanks for explaining that to me. I was merely asking what they were, ahd they existed. I knew that this was something that someone would bite onto and help me understand what it was. (or was not, in this case).

As much as you cling to your ideas of spiritualism, the fact is, even if you are right, then your experiences are explained by physics. It only means that some particular branch of scientific knowledge is not quite yet understood

Maybe I am a spiritualist, but like I said, I was just curious.

[Colonel Olrik]

Thanks for explaining that to me. I was merely asking what they were, ahd they existed. I knew that this was something that someone would bite onto and help me understand what it was. (or was not, in this case).

No prob.

Maybe I am a spiritualist, but like I said, I was just curious.

Yes, this time I wasn't making judgment values about spiritualism.

I was merely pointing out that, in the event those phenomenas are real, they are not above physics. It just means science is still lacking in that particular field.

[haas mark]

Maybe I am a spiritualist, but like I said, I was just curious.

Yes, this time I wasn't making judgment values about spiritualism.

I was merely pointing out that, in the event those phenomenas are real, they are not above physics. It just means science is still lacking in that particular field.

Maybe, but it's always interesting to wonder if there were such a thing.

[Darth Wong]

From Merriam-Webster:

1 a (1) : a division of philosophy that is concerned with the fundamental nature of reality and being and that includes ontology, cosmology, and often epistemology (2) : ONTOLOGY 2 b : abstract philosophical studies : a study of what is outside objective experience

Sounds like a waste of time to me. Proudly subjective, expending much effort to ask questions about whether observed reality is true reality (one of those questions philosphers love to ask even though no one seriously doubts that it is), shying away from any sort of absolute objective criteria for determining the validity of a theory.

Ultimately, methods other than science share the common weakness that they elevate the intelligence of their own practitioners, not the ruthless and unalterable dictates of Nature itself, to be the ultimate arbiter of truth.

[haas mark]

From Merriam-Webster:

1 a (1) : a division of philosophy that is concerned with the fundamental nature of reality and being and that includes ontology, cosmology, and often epistemology (2) : ONTOLOGY 2 b : abstract philosophical studies : a study of what is outside objective experience

Sounds like a waste of time to me. Proudly subjective, expending much effort to ask questions about whether observed reality is true reality (one of those questions philosphers love to ask even though no one seriously doubts that it is), shying away from any sort of absolute objective criteria for determining the validity of a theory.

Ultimately, methods other than science share the common weakness that they elevate the intelligence of their own practitioners, not the ruthless and unalterable dictates of Nature itself, to be the ultimate arbiter of truth.

Okay. That makes sense. Now, suppose, JUST SUPPOSE, that this were real? What would things be like? Would they be different? If so, significantly?

[SirNitram]

Even if you had 'supernatural' things, we can expect them to follow the basics of science.

Like, energy will be conserved. If there was a way to conjure a ball of light, you must be drawing the energy from somewhere(Perhaps pulling thermal energy from the enviroment?).

Momentum will be conserved. If someone flies up, something else must fall down, or you risk the person's brains trying to exit via their boots.

In the end, metaphysics is a serious misnomer if it's something real. Though there are things outside of science, they are things of philosophy and theology(Questions like if there are souls, etc), not anything in the physical world.

[The Dark]

From Merriam-Webster:

1 a (1) : a division of philosophy that is concerned with the fundamental nature of reality and being and that includes ontology, cosmology, and often epistemology (2) : ONTOLOGY 2 b : abstract philosophical studies : a study of what is outside objective experience

Sounds like a waste of time to me. Proudly subjective, expending much effort to ask questions about whether observed reality is true reality (one of those questions philosphers love to ask even though no one seriously doubts that it is), shying away from any sort of absolute objective criteria for determining the validity of a theory.

Ultimately, methods other than science share the common weakness that they elevate the intelligence of their own practitioners, not the ruthless and unalterable dictates of Nature itself, to be the ultimate arbiter of truth.

Okay. That makes sense. Now, suppose, JUST SUPPOSE, that this were real? What would things be like? Would they be different? If so, significantly?

From what I've learned, it would basically mean that the observable universe is not necessarily the ultimate reality. David Hume proposed that all of reality is thought and idea, rather than matter. There's a relatively new philosophy where instead of being object-driven, like most philosophies, it runs on the theory that all "things" are really events (don't ask me to explain that one, I haven't read enough to understand it). Immanuel Kant proposed that the observable universe is that part of reality which we can understand, aka the noumena, but there is a part of reality we cannot comprehend, called the phenomena, and structures in our brain cause us to interpret phenomena as noumena. As DW said, it's mostly useless, but it can be an interesting diversion to see what people can come up with.

As far as practical real life goes, metaphysical realities would not change anything. They are merely a deductive (and subjective) probing into the possible nature of reality rather than the scientific inductive (and objective) probing into the reality of nature.