Metaphysics

[ticktockclok]

What do you think of it? I'm reading a book lately which gave a pretty good reason for why its utter bullshit. I once considered doing metaphysics in college, so the bashing surprised me.

[Shamou]

Mythos over logos…

Metaphysic largely defines what we see as logic… the problem is that people have been bastardizing metaphysic in order to commercialize it…

Metaphysic explores the highest level of thinking and is not very well suited to commercialism… So, if you want to study metaphysic to expand your mind… fine… if you’re trying to make a buck… you’re on the wrong horse…


This is what Pirsig has to say about metaphysic and logic…

"The term logos, the root word of “logic,” refers to the sum total of our rational understanding of the world.

Mythos is the sum total of the early historic and prehistoric myths which preceded the logos.

The mythos includes not only the Greek myths but the Old Testament, the Vedic Hymns and the early legends of all cultures which have contributed to our present world understanding.

The mythos-over-logos argument states that our rationality is shaped by these legends."
.

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by ticktockclok

What do you think of it? I'm reading a book lately which gave a pretty good reason for why its utter bullshit. I once considered doing metaphysics in college, so the bashing surprised me.

ticktockclok, alot of metaphysics is bullshit. This is true. But then....alot of it isn't, so be sure to keep your avenues open. This is my opinion which I'm giving to you because you asked for it. It is always important to remember that popularity doesn't necessarily make something wrong, and its also important to remember that popularity also doesn't make something right. Everybody is equally capable of perceiving reality inaccurately, and that includes scientists, philosophers, and theologians.

In closing, I leave you with a quote from Lord Bucket:

So read the Bible. Read the Koran. Read the Three Little Pigs. Read EVERYTHING! You'll be certain to read a lot of silly things, but you'll also stand a chance of seeing bits and pieces of TRUTH.

[Brutha]

You can attack a lot of philosophy with the criticismn that it is useless in the real world.
Their was for example a study which concluded that ethics professors are more unetical than other philosophy professors.

Physicists don't like it when they want to explain how reality works and they get attacked on grounds of metaphysics.

When you want to explain how reality works you need metaphysics, but it seldom produces practical results.

[Mark Lapierre]

I don't think it's fair to say metaphysics itself is BS. Metaphysics is the philosophy of the nature of reality. Reality is not BS, neither is trying to understand it through logic.

Yeah sure, some ideas that come out of it seem completely nuts. But it's important to remember that because what some people say makes no sense, doesn't mean that the thing they're talking about is nonsense.

[Brutha]

I don't think it's fair to say metaphysics itself is BS. Metaphysics is the philosophy of the nature of reality. Reality is not BS, neither is trying to understand it through logic.

Logic is metaphysic.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by Brutha

Logic is metaphysic.

Could you explain what you mean by that?

[Brutha]

Logic is a subfield of metaphysics (the kind of metaphysics you get when you study metaphysics in college).

[Mark Lapierre]

Hmm, our definitions of logic and metaphysics must be different. In my understanding logic is the study and process of validating inferences, through and in aid of formalised argumentation and reasoning. And metaphysics is the study of the nature of reality.

So while logic may be applied in metaphysics, how is metaphysics a subset of logic? Is the metaphysics you study in college somehow different to my understanding of what metaphysics is?

[Shamou]

Traditionally, logic is studied as a branch of philosophy, one part of the classical trivium, which consisted of grammar, logic, and rhetoric.



Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the ultimate nature of reality,

.

[Brutha]

Let take the classical logical example:
Socrates is a human, humans are mortal therefore Socrates was mortal.

It's also a statement about what it means to be human which is one metaphysical question.

Russels Paradox that concludes that their are things that are neither true nor false, (statement like: "This statement is false") is also about the nature of the reality of object and at the same time classical logical stuff.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by Brutha

Let take the classical logical example:
Socrates is a human, humans are mortal therefore Socrates was mortal.

It's also a statement about what it means to be human which is one metaphysical question.

If that example demonstrates that metaphysics is a subset of logic, then cars are also a subset of logic as demonstrated by this example:

An Integra is a Honda, Hondas are cars, therefore an Integra is a car.

Besides, anthropology is the study of what it means to be human, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Brutha

Russels Paradox that concludes that their are things that are neither true nor false, (statement like: "This statement is false") is also about the nature of the reality of object and at the same time classical logical stuff.

Classical logical stuff yes, but it seems more about the nature of language (and I suppose mathematics) than about the nature of reality.

[Angela]

Metaphysics: the branch of philosophy that treats of first principles, includes ontology and cosmology, and is intimately connected with epistemology.

How in the world could such a study be bullshit? Maybe some particular interpretation could be so considered. But what field of inquiry is more worthwhile than the field of being?

[Brutha]

Wikipedia:Aristotle's Metaphysics was divided into three parts, in addition to some smaller sections related to a philosophical lexicon and some reprinted extracts from the Physics, which are now regarded as the proper branches of traditional Western metaphysics:
[...]
Universal science
The study of first principles, which Aristotle believed to be the foundation of all other inquiries. An example of such a principle is the law of noncontradiction and the status it holds in non-paraconsistent logics.

If that example demonstrates that metaphysics is a subset of logic, then cars are also a subset of logic as demonstrated by this example:

I haven't said that humans are a subset of logic but that Being human is.
Then a question what it means to be a car is also metaphysical.
Then you have questions in metaphysics like: "Do unicorns have one horn?" which are about what it means to be a unicorn.
And do cars have the attribute of Being in a way that results in unicorns having one horn?

That question isn't really about cars but about metaphysics.

Classical logical stuff yes, but it seems more about the nature of language (and I suppose mathematics) than about the nature of reality.

Metaphysics is about first principles.
You begin with something like their is an reality. Then you go on to say that their are things you can say about reality that are true and that their are also things about reality that are false (logic).
You need to do a bit of work before you can do interesting stuff like proofs of God's existence.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by Brutha

I haven't said that humans are a subset of logic but that Being human is.
Then a question what it means to be a car is also metaphysical.
Then you have questions in metaphysics like: "Do unicorns have one horn?" which are about what it means to be a unicorn.
And do cars have the attribute of Being in a way that results in unicorns having one horn?

That question isn't really about cars but about metaphysics.

Ok, I can see how metaphysics deals with the philosophical question of being (as opposed to the mechanistic or materialistic question, i.e., what is a car? Answer: A chassis, engine, wheels, etc.)

But I don't see how it follows that logic is a field of metaphysics. In the example you gave you showed that logic can be used to analyse metaphysics, but it doesn't show that logic is metaphysics. Likewise, what it means to be human is studied in metaphysics, and logic is used as a tool in that study, but I don't see how it follows that the study of being human is therefore a superset of logic.

Originally Posted by Brutha

Metaphysics is about first principles.
You begin with something like their is an reality. Then you go on to say that their are things you can say about reality that are true and that their are also things about reality that are false (logic).
You need to do a bit of work before you can do interesting stuff like proofs of God's existence.

Right. But again that's using logic as a tool. Which seems to make it as much a subfield of metaphysics as all of philosophy. And yet wikipedia says logic is traditionally studied as one of the branches of philosophy.

So, at least according to wikipedia, metaphysics and logic are both branches of philosophy. And the study of first principles within metaphysics shows that part of logic is studied in metaphysics, but not all. So wouldn't it be more accurate to say that metaphysics contains part of logic, but not necessarily the whole set. I.e., if you're studying logic on its own, you're not necessarily studying metaphysics, as would be implied if the whole of logic was a subfield of metaphysics (which is what I think you're saying).

A diagram would be useful here. Imagine two ovals, one labeled logic, another labeled metaphysics. They overlap in the middle, and that middle is labeled first principles, but there are separate sections in both logic and metaphysics too.

Does that sound right? (ultimately it's not that important, I just want to get the definition right)