Metaphysics is a self delusional anadyne

[Grendel]

Our logical intuitions are just part of our subjective experience. Logic, however, is a metaphysical concept. It's what we imagine exists that would be consistent with our logical intuitions. And then there are methods of logic, which are inevitably metaphysical theories about logic. Most of them are crap, no even consistent with our logical intuitions.

i'm sorry, and I don't mean to offend. I don't buy into the quasi-superstitious-nursery-rhymes that follow the, 'I think, ergo I am' school-of-platitudes

There is a physical reality only, and we interact physically with it. These are objective actions, interactions, and reactions with a reality that options only chance and necessity. It's possible to understand this and feel it, touch it, taste it despite our (your?) belief that we can only subjectively and metaphysically experience it second hand, and that we lose understanding by that translation.

'Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Moriarty: Crap!

 

[ruby sparks]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Good article. You should read it.

I largely agree with what it says. Our views on consciousness are lathered with spechul sauce, thus we are prone to self-delusions about it, and there is really no need or basis for that. Sure it's in some ways mysterious, but that's only because our understanding is partial and could be said of many things. In some ways, the issue is boring and unexciting. Consciousness emerges from brain activity and is (merely) 'what human brains do'.

As for metaphysics generally, it could be replaced with the word physics and a lot of confusion and historical baggage would be avoided.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Don't agree. A more modern term for the same thing is metanarrative. It answers things like, why do you get out of bed in the morning? What is your place in the world? Why should you accept your station in life? What is worth fighting for? What is the ultimate goal? How does the thing you are doing now contribute to you reaching your ultimate goals in life? What of these goals do I share with others, and how important is it? If you don't answer these questions you'll lack direction in life. You won't be able to get anything done. Often we fall back on default metanarratives. But if you do, you don't really know why you like the stuff you like or why you are doing what you are doing. It's a pretty empty life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metanarrative

In the ancient world the supernatural and secular were closely linked. Paganism is a very sophisticated type of religion. Paganism works just fine if the gods are 100% metaphors, just to help clarify metanarratives. The term "metaphysics" is a pagan term that's survived into the modern world.

 

[Grendel]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Good article. You should read it.

I largely agree with what it says. Our views on consciousness are lathered with spechul sauce, thus we are prone to self-delusions about it, and there is really no need or basis for that.

I agree with it too, on faith. Though I haven't read that one I've read others.

The Philosophy of Physics has become more closely aligned, through continental drift over eons, to Alchemy than it is to the reality presented by Quantum Mechanics. Philosophy can't deal with a discrete Universe. We need an entirely new philosophy and one free of Spinozas and Boethius' and Satres. And everthing ever written by Aristotle and his illegitimate father Plato should be burnt, even letters to their Mums.

 

[ruby sparks]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Good article. You should read it.

I largely agree with what it says. Our views on consciousness are lathered with spechul sauce, thus we are prone to self-delusions about it, and there is really no need or basis for that.

I agree with it too, on faith. Though I haven't read that one I've read others.

The Philosophy of Physics has become more closely aligned, through continental drift over eons, to Alchemy than it is to the reality presented by Quantum Mechanics. Philosophy can't deal with a discrete Universe. We need an entirely new philosophy and one free of Spinozas and Boethius' and Satres. And everthing ever written by Aristotle and his illegitimate father Plato should be burnt, even letters to their Mums.

Up to a point, yes. But there is theoretical and speculative physics, which is always seeking to go beyond the 'rules' that we understand, and to me that is ok, even if it is in some ways more philosophical than empirical. We should never assume that the physics we know is all there is.

I'll be honest with you, I'm not even sure what metaphysics meaningfully is. A lot of the time I'm happy with dropping the meta bit. 'Speculative physics' would cover anything I can think of.

 

[Grendel]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Don't agree. A more modern term for the same thing is metanarrative. It answers things like, why do you get out of bed in the morning? What is your place in the world? Why should you accept your station in life? What is worth fighting for? What is the ultimate goal? How does the thing you are .................

Dr Zoidberg,

Thank you, but your entire post is anthromorphic, which is fine if your only concern is yourself and the rest of the sub-species. You can't apply it to an Ant, or an Aardvark or a Zebra ... so it's strictly limited.

One physical material reality ... no purpose, no prevision. Ergo: no goals.

 

[Grendel]

Up to a point, yes. But there is theoretical and speculative physics, which is always seeking to go beyond the 'rules' that we understand, and to me that is ok, even if it is in some ways philosophical. We should never assume that the physics we know is all there is.

Of course there is speculation at the beginning of all scientific investigation. I've never thought of that as a philosophy. I would have thought it kinda goes without saying

 

[Grendel]

Hi, Grandel! Howdy. How are thing in Bunya Mountains?

Hi Aup ... all is good with me. Hope the same for you n yours

 

[DrZoidberg]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Don't agree. A more modern term for the same thing is metanarrative. It answers things like, why do you get out of bed in the morning? What is your place in the world? Why should you accept your station in life? What is worth fighting for? What is the ultimate goal? How does the thing you are .................

Dr Zoidberg,

Thank you, but your entire post is anthromorphic, which is fine if your only concern is yourself and the rest of the sub-species. You can't apply it to an Ant, or an Aardvark or a Zebra ... so it's strictly limited.

Anthromoporphism is to turn other creatures or forces of nature into humans. Letting animals be animals or letting humans be humans isn't anthropomorphism.

One physical material reality ... no purpose, no prevision. Ergo: no goals.

That's the problem, isn't it. Life doesn't seem to have an intrinsic meaning of life. We need to give that to it. If we don't, we'll be paralysed. If you get anything done in life it's because you have a life's purpose, a goal. You need a meaning of life, a grand over-arching narrative to it. Even if it's a lie. This is the main theme of Nietzsche's critique of Schopenhauer, and arguably the main point of his work. Aka, "affirmative nihilsm".

Just by making this thread you've proven yourself wrong.

 

[ruby sparks]

Up to a point, yes. But there is theoretical and speculative physics, which is always seeking to go beyond the 'rules' that we understand, and to me that is ok, even if it is in some ways philosophical. We should never assume that the physics we know is all there is.

Of course there is speculation at the beginning of all scientific investigation. I've never thought of that as a philosophy. I would have thought it kinda goes without saying

But to be fair it is philosophy. Philosophy is still embedded in science, and even the empirical testing part is applied philosophy.

What many people refer to as philosophy is 'pure' or 'unapplied' philosophy, and this may be what most people who call themselves philosophers nowadays do. And yes, imo it is of very limited value when it comes to gaining increased knowledge about reality, although fun and interesting, and with a role to play (albeit mostly commentary).

 

[Speakpigeon]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Don't agree. A more modern term for the same thing is metanarrative. It answers things like, why do you get out of bed in the morning? What is your place in the world? Why should you accept your station in life? What is worth fighting for? What is the ultimate goal? How does the thing you are doing now contribute to you reaching your ultimate goals in life? What of these goals do I share with others, and how important is it? If you don't answer these questions you'll lack direction in life. You won't be able to get anything done. Often we fall back on default metanarratives. But if you do, you don't really know why you like the stuff you like or why you are doing what you are doing. It's a pretty empty life.

That's no contradiction to what the OP claims. What you suggest we should do could be re-branded as "anodyne" to use the OP's word. And one could enjoy doing metaphysics every minute of his life and still see it as anodyne. Choose your poison sort of.

Oh, wait, in fact it's clear we can't stop doing it anyway, including this OP's author. Just to insist that there is a physical world out there is a metaphysical claim. The fact that we all believe in it, including me, doesn't change the situation.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

We will need metaphysics as long as we're unable to know what is real.
EB

But we do know, now, what is real?

And here you go all metaphysical. See? It's very difficult not to do it.

Some of it we know, or at least I assume you do too, but as for me there's no doubt I know my qualia and that's definitely something real. What I don't know, and I don't think you do either, is whatever there may be outside my subjective experience. That's where the metaphysics starts. And we know so little that we have to be forgiven for going into metaphysical claims. And if you believe in a deterministic physical world you should infer that we are determined to go into metaphysics whenever we do (and not to go into it whenever we don't). Sounds like we don't have that much to talk about about once we accept this premise. You're OP is doing what it seems to say we shouldn't do. Something of a self-contradictory injunction. Food for your thoughts.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Ok, I read the blog you linked entirely. It's mostly true but not quite. The basic facts are correct but the conclusion is hilariously idiotic.

Actually I never read it. I just judged the book by it's cover. But you have to remember that the writers of that blog are no where near as clever as you, so you need to cut them a little slack.

I don't need to be clever, I only need to be right.

I'm sure they are cleverer but it's just that reality is what is it and we can't do anything about that I'm sure you will agree and so it's just the case that I'm right and they're wrong, clever as they are. A fact.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Our logical intuitions are just part of our subjective experience. Logic, however, is a metaphysical concept. It's what we imagine exists that would be consistent with our logical intuitions. And then there are methods of logic, which are inevitably metaphysical theories about logic. Most of them are crap, no even consistent with our logical intuitions.

i'm sorry, and I don't mean to offend. I don't buy into the quasi-superstitious-nursery-rhymes that follow the, 'I think, ergo I am' school-of-platitudes

There is a physical reality only, and we interact physically with it. These are objective actions, interactions, and reactions with a reality that options only chance and necessity. It's possible to understand this and feel it, touch it, taste it despite our (your?) belief that we can only subjectively and metaphysically experience it second hand, and that we lose understanding by that translation.

'Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Moriarty: Crap!

How do you decide that some view is very nearly superstitious and another just right? How do you know that what you take to be your perception of a material world is not something else entirely? All you have is what you take for your perceptions. How could you possibly know that they are actual perception? I'm supposed to be very clever but I don't know how to answer that. Feel free to explain this to me.

As for me, it's much simpler. I know I think whenever I know I think. Just explain to me how I don't know I think whenever I know I think.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Our views on consciousness are lathered with spechul sauce, thus we are prone to self-delusions about it, and there is really no need or basis for that.

I have to agree with that but it would be nice you provide an example of that "spechul sauce".

Consciousness emerges from brain activity and is (merely) 'what human brains do'.

Oh, here it is! Thank! You read my mind! Bravo.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

One physical material reality

Prove it.
EB

 

[DrZoidberg]

Only physical and material reality exists. Everything else is metaphysical verbiosity.

Don't agree. A more modern term for the same thing is metanarrative. It answers things like, why do you get out of bed in the morning? What is your place in the world? Why should you accept your station in life? What is worth fighting for? What is the ultimate goal? How does the thing you are doing now contribute to you reaching your ultimate goals in life? What of these goals do I share with others, and how important is it? If you don't answer these questions you'll lack direction in life. You won't be able to get anything done. Often we fall back on default metanarratives. But if you do, you don't really know why you like the stuff you like or why you are doing what you are doing. It's a pretty empty life.

That's no contradiction to what the OP claims. What you suggest we should do could be re-branded as "anodyne" to use the OP's word. And one could enjoy doing metaphysics every minute of his life and still see it as anodyne. Choose your poison sort of.

Oh, wait, in fact it's clear we can't stop doing it anyway, including this OP's author. Just to insist that there is a physical world out there is a metaphysical claim. The fact that we all believe in it, including me, doesn't change the situation.
EB

I think our brains have evolved to think metaphysically. Even though we rationally might be nihilists our emotions can't use that belief. It's not motivating. And we are inherently emotiinally driven creatures

 

[Speakpigeon]

I think our brains have evolved to think metaphysically. Even though we rationally might be nihilists our emotions can't use that belief. It's not motivating. And we are inherently emotiinally driven creatures

I don't think we need to bring in emotions to explain we can't stop our metaphysical musing. Logic itself is about possibilities. Logical analysis is essentially the identification of logically possible cases. Metaphysics is just delving into a long line of sub-cases of sub-cases of just one of all the initial possible logical cases. God logically exists or not. OK, let's go with God exists. So, God logically is all powerful or not. OK, let's got with all powerful. And so on. Emotions probably decide which sub-cases we choose to assume but the basic mechanism is just logic, and using it has to be the rational thing to do. What else? Of course, being rational also crucially involves checking that your metaphysics is consistent with your qualia. But maybe, according to this, religious people, some of them at least, might be very rational. They may just not have the same qualia as non-believers do...
EB

 

[4321lynx]

Originally Posted by ruby sparks
Our views on consciousness are lathered with spechul sauce, thus we are prone to self-delusions about it, and there is really no need or basis for that.

Congratulations on your use of "lathered". These views of ours on consciousness, as well as our musings called metaphysics, are lathered indeed. Lots of froth and little worth-while substance.

 

[ruby sparks]

I only need to be right.

No shit. Who would have ever guessed it?