/lit/ - Literature

based

>>20929872
> metaphysics
his IQ means nothing if he can't see through the wordplay that is metaphysics

>>20929872
Explain it.

>>20930175
>cannot see beyond the physical
You are not fit to speak of IQ.

>>20929872

Metaphysics are great for poets (especially when the abstract concepts can be a source for metaphors that use concrete imagery) and are a entertaining exercise that warm the muscles before real science is done.

Metaphysics are like the coffee mathematicians drink before they set down to work (it warms the stomach, it provides a little energy and wakefulness), or a form of workout for developing the muscles and cardiovascular capacity of the intellect. Brilliant people tend to enjoy metaphysics.

But when you’re really going after the truth about the universe, about what time is and what forces govern the universe and what’s inside the cells and how life first originated and how black holes work and what stars are made of and how the universe originated and how DNA first emerged, etc, etc, when it comes down to this if you don’t work with evidence, with mathematics, with hypothesis that can be subject to proof, if you don’t walk the really difficult path you’re doing it wrong and have already lost.

One can say that Einstein’s first insights on relativity were almost poetic and metaphysical in their nature, and the same with several people through history that somehow hinted at natural selection. But the real deal was the work that Einstein and Darwin made after the insight: mathematical proof, rigorous observation of nature, the submitting of their findings to the inquiry of other experts, etc. That’s the actual hard work.

When it comes down to metaphysics and insights you might end up finding the embryos of many great scientific discoveries in the work of poets. But such poets, brilliant as they were, wouldn’t be capable of actually sculpting their intuitions into solid marble statues of proved theories.

Metaphysics are fun mental games and a form of complex poetic exercise of the mind, but there’s no real truth-unveiling in them.

The guy on the pic is too arrogant to actually do the really hard work or to admit that he was wrong when confronted with evidence. There’s no way to move forward in learning about nature of you act like this.

>>20930175
Metaphysics has reached its end goal. For all this talk of the "idea that'll end philosophy", " The final stage of evolution of philosophical history", the elusive "philosopher's stone" the answer had been right in front of us all along.

Its Science! The metaphysical endgame. The game was over long ago, we are witnessing the post metaphysical age

>>20930310
>>20930332
Go back faggot

>>20930310
>submitting of their findings to the inquiry of other experts
Inquiry of experts is irrelevant. Independent replication of experimental results is the only thing that matters

>>20930310
>>20930332
ho
lee
C R I N G E

>>20930652
>>20930721
t. Buttblasted

>>20930310
>Metaphysics are great for poets (especially when the abstract concepts can be a source for metaphors that use concrete imagery) and are a entertaining exercise that warm the muscles before real science is done.
>Metaphysics are like the coffee mathematicians drink before they set down to work (it warms the stomach, it provides a little energy and wakefulness), or a form of workout for developing the muscles and cardiovascular capacity of the intellect. Brilliant people tend to enjoy metaphysics.

Nice

>>20930175

Lol

r*ddit: the thread.

Nvm, more like rationalwiki: the thread.

>>20930310
>Epistemological metaphysics is irrelivant to finding the truth
>Meanwhile these disciplines which make 1000 logical and methodological assumptions about reality which can't be questioned are relevant to finding the truth
I think you might be the arrogant one

>>20929872
There is a gap in his derivation of the PSR, which he uses to enforce closure on multiple types of reasons (e.g. causes). Also, he claims synthetic a priori statements actually exist using the human cognitive syntax, but he hasn't shown this.

>>20930175
Lmao

>>20930700
This

>>20930310
>he still believes there is "truth" about "the universe"

>>20930175
>no proofs ever
LOL aristotle’s form and matter is parsimonious with a elementary particle theory. To deny the means of verifying philosophical claims with logic is to deny the possibility of verifying scientific claims with logic. Euclidian geometry involves proofs which are a priori.

>>20929872
He is literally Steven Seagal tier

>>20933288
>Aristotle

Stopped reading right there tbqhwyf

>>20930310
You misunderstand the ends which metaphysics and the sciences seek. Trying to make some kind of value comparison between them is stupid. Science strives for scientific truth within a logical/philosophical paradigm. Philosophy strives for ultimate truth without any paradigm or faith-based axiom (you could argue language is the paradigm philosophical truth is contained within, but so is scientific truth, to an even greater extent). This is why metaphysics seems fruitless, because in order for an ontology to be ontology as such, it can’t contradict the ontic. Philosophy is sculpted by the possibilities of reality and science simply finds more modes of possibility, more modes of being and studies of being.

>>20933302
We already know you don't read

>>20933316
I can read you well enough to know you're an /x/ schizo turned Plato reading pseud who now indulges himself in Metaphysics to feel unique about himself instead of actually studying ethics and logic

>>20933345
Metaphysics bleeds into logic, in fact they're basically the same topic if you are #intheknow. Ethics on the other hand is an absolute meme discipline. Holy wew

>>20933351
>Metaphysics bleeds into logic

>>20933345
You will see the light as soon as you dare to ask yourself the question: now where does this logic actually come from? But for now it seems you are trapped in your bugman paradigm based on ungrounded ideas of “rigor” and “worthwhile study.”

>>20933345
Ethics is empty and logic is sufficiently complete to anyone who has completed undergrad maths. So yeah, again you can't read.

>>20933375
It straight up does. This is actually obvious if you stop to think for a second about how and why logic could even "work"

>>20933383
Math is formal logic. Logic is broader than that and encompasses a great deal of semantic ambiguity

>>20933380
I remember my Gnostic phase too and telling others they're Hylics as I carried myself with such pompous declaration of my own understanding of existence. You'll grow out of it eventually. Anyways...

>Where does logic come from

(you)

>>20933383
You're entire basis is unoriginal and completely lifted of Plato who was a dishonest grifter that created stories out of thin air and used a fabricated version of Socrates to compliment his faggot ponderints. Ironic that you're telling others they don't read.

>>20933385
If you actually studied ethics and logic you would understand but like 85% of this board they're all wiki readers.

>>20929881
fpbp

>>20933380
>But for now it seems you are trapped in your bugman paradigm based on ungrounded ideas of “rigor” and “worthwhile study.”

>>/x/

>>20933389
>Math is formal logic.
Which is why being very familiar with maths will teach you everything you need to know about applied logic, which is then easy enough, by far (due to the intellectual rigour involved in maths which teaches you how to think both broadly and specifically), to abstract into general principles when getting to know metaphysics. Besides, discrete maths usually encompasses pure logic by itself, and even systematizes it into boolean algebra or set theory, which enables you not only to learn the principles of pure logic, but also apply them in proofs.
>>20933421
You're underaged. I've never had a "Gnostic phase" because I am not stupid.

>>20933288
>parsimonious = unwilling to spend money or use resources; stingy or frugal.
what do u mean by
>aristotle’s form and matter is parsimonious with a elementary particle theory