/lit/ - Literature

Metaphysics is an entirely nonsensical and obsolete field. While it is already cringeworthy that metaphysics fails to answer its own questions, it is even worse that metaphysics fails even harder at phrasing its questions in such a way that they become meaningfully answerable in the first place. Upon closer examination all of metaphysics appears to be wordcel confusion ("language games") dating back to a primitive late bronze age understanding of the world propagated by ancient Greek midwits. The most legitimate answer to questions of "existence" (a horribly semantically overloaded word with no distinct philosophical meaning of its own) is ultimately and unironically "It just is, okay?"

>>21454264
Lmao great chart

>>21454264
this is without a doubt one of the charts i've ever seen

>>21454264
I love Eckhurt Towel, one of the greatest minds of our generation

Bruh... Tolle next to Hegel and Heidegger lmao. Metaphysics is a serious discipline and it is ultimately inescapable because its exigency intrudes by virtue of the constant presence of presuppositions in anything we say and understand. It will never go away.

Modernity struggles to comprehend it because the ultimate signification of metaphysical concepts is taken to have been cut down to size by faith in paradigms which are themselves questionable.

It can't all be language games, because it's an ultimately ungrounded 'meta'-move to instate the framework of language games, i.e., for Witt to assert the modulation of sense from real signification to contextual use alone. It works, sure, and you can choose to adopt this reduction, but it is not unquestionable.

It can't all be psychological either, because why assume the immanent space of psychic projection when the soul and the mental has not always been understood in such a way?

Uncover, examine, and ground your presuppositions, bros..

Also, 'existence' has very specific and complex meanings throughout the last 2500 years, none of which are semantically-reducible. Take Aquinas' real distinction, for instance.

>>21454264
missing Whitehead

sorry brainlets, this book ended metaphysics

>>21455369
Qrd?

>>21455376
the book stages itself a critique of anglo/analytic metaphysics which is a lot of armchair 'first philosophy' based on folk understandings of elementary physics. the authors argue that metaphysics should not be conducted as a pure a priori science, but must rest on our best scientific theories (hence the 'metaphysics naturalized' subtitle).
the authors take the position of 'ontic structural realism' which is to say, that "things do not exist, only structure exists". while they do rely mostly on high energy physics (quantum field theory etc) they give an account of how the entities described by the "special sciences" (i.e. non physical sciences) are meaningful pragmatic shorthands ("real patterns") for lower-level phenomena.

>>21455689
Oh ok

>>21455689
What's a representative passage from this work that was most salient to you?

>>21454264
I’m still pissed I got memed into reading that Eckart Tolle book.

>>21454264
Trash list. Full of gay memes.

>>21455738
>Ontic Structural Realism (OSR) is the view that the world has an objective modal structure that is ontologically fundamental, in the sense of not supervening on the intrinsic properties of a set of individuals. According to OSR, even the identity and individuality of objects depends on the relational structure of the world. Hence, a first approximation to our metaphysics is: ‘There are no things. Structure is all there is.’ We of course acknowledge that special sciences are richly populated with individual objects. Thus, to accommodate their elimination from metaphysics we will owe a non-ad hoc account of the point and value of reference to and generalization over objects in sciences other than fundamental physics. We will argue that objects are pragmatic devices used by agents to orient themselves in regions of spacetime, and to construct approximate representations of the world.

>>21455885
Thanken

>>21454285
>ultimately and unironically "It just is, okay?"
Absolute failed.
There’s a very strong case made during the growth of phenomenology that existence/being can only be characterized by dynamic activity and a constantly remodeling relationship to one’s surroundings, this is the idea of existence before essence, being-in-the-world, readiness-to-hand, and similar concepts. You’re not even within the last century with the naturists of your perspective of metaphysics. Read moar.