/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.7464548]

Why is metaphysics largely rejected today?
Isn't the grounds in which metaphysics is denied it itself a metaphysical position?

[Anonymous No.7464552]

>>7464548
>Why is metaphysics largely rejected today?

Because sane people would rather deal with real issues, not made up nonsense.

[Anonymous No.7464555]

>>7464552
>carrying logical conclusions to necessary ends
Do you hate geometric and mathematical demonstrations as well?

Do you just not like wisdom but only immediately apparent predictive power?

[Anonymous No.7464557]

>>7464552
also
>being this condescending
>can't legitimately deny metaphysics, just ignore it strongly

[Anonymous No.7464572]

It isn't, you're just posting on a science board where it's obscurities are nestled away and used without knowing (i.e. holography)
If you want to discuss metaphysics there's plenty of that, you just need to dig it out and identify it in a language understandable to the empiricists here. If you want to discuss the philosophy of metaphysics please take it to /lit/ because no one here is well-read or patient enough to start talking metametaphysics.

[Anonymous No.7464581]

Because:
- Metaphysics is based on unintuitive axioms.
- Metaphysics is often just for theology and ethics, which makes the fedoraic children of today despise it.
- Metaphysics does not provide any substantial knowledge or wisdom.

[Anonymous No.7464616]

>>7464581
>-Metaphysics is based on unintuitive axioms.
?
>-Metaphysics is often just for theology and ethics, which makes the fedoraic children of today despise it.
This is true. Modern science and philosophy began as an exercise of trying to shut down scholasticism and Aristotelian thought rather than seek truth.

>-Metaphysics does not provide any substantial knowledge or wisdom.
This is a metaphysical claim that rests on metaphysical arguments. The moment you make your case for this, you refute yourself.

[Anonymous No.7464623]

>>7464555
>>7464557
why are there so many troll threads on sci? fuck off faggot and stop making shit up.

[Anonymous No.7464624]

>>7464623
>making shit up
>this is what modern people believe

[Anonymous No.7464712]

>>7464548
>Why is metaphysics largely rejected today?
You've been hanging around the wrong crowd. Try hanging out with people that has actually read books that aren't textbooks, pop-sci, and science fiction novels.

[Anonymous No.7464726]

>>7464712
A good start is to get off /sci/. When you get back after a couple of years (presumably after a lot of shutting the fuck up and calculating), you should be fine.

[Anonymous No.7464732]

>>7464726
Of course, if you ever get tenure, and you're at the end of your life and academic career, you'll have an urge to circle back to philosophy. This is completely natural and nothing to be ashamed of.

[Anonymous No.7464740]

People here are one dimensional, and have brains entirely designed for the only dimension they are aware of.

[Anonymous No.7464757]

>>7464740
>> implying dimensions are alternate realities
>> /x is over there

[Anonymous No.7464762]

Arguably the smartest man on earth is a metaphysician

[Anonymous No.7464809]

>>7464762
He's a doctor who studies doctors?

[Anonymous No.7464814]

>>7464757
>Implying I was implying anything.

Getting bored, last post...Try again.

[Anonymous No.7464861]

>>7464809
ebin

[Anonymous No.7464970]

>>7464712
I find it more widespread than that. Metaphysics is largely not understood as a science, despite it being considered one since the classical period until the moderns.

[Anonymous No.7465411]

>>7464552
>attacking character of the poster
>name calling but no actual point or argument against the OP
You have already clearly demonstrated that you do poorly in arguments involving deductive logic. You may as well leave, you don't have a use in this thread.

As for the OP: yes, it seems as though any position will inevitably be a metaphysical one whether one wants it to be or not. The real issue with metaphysics is that it is entirely unprovable considering that we must use physics to prove things about our universe to ourselves. How could we get around this? Without a valid way of proof, we are left with only deductive logic, which is tough to work with because it is easy to be wrong and not recognize it.

[Anonymous No.7465427]

Bumping for potential

[Anonymous No.7465463]

>>7464572

this SHOULD have been /thread

[Anonymous No.7465491]

>>7465463
>muh shit philosophy
>muh secret well-read metaphysics club

[Anonymous No.7465495]

>>7465491
>muh hardcore le science only club; no interpretation/conceptual analysis allowed
>muh tips le empirical method god is fake lel :)

[Anonymous No.7465510]

>>7464548
>Why is metaphysics largely rejected
>rejected

It's not rejected, just not the domain of math and science.

>>>/lit/

[Anonymous No.7465521]

>>7464548
meta physics is everything which lies over the physics, physics which is about experimental facts.

experiment physics = physics
theoretical physics and every other field relying on experimental facts = metaphysics

[Anonymous No.7465527]

>>7465411
>Without a valid way of proof, we are left with only deductive logic, which is tough to work with because it is easy to be wrong and not recognize it.
physics using causation after induction, everything beyond experimental physics is nothing but deductive logic

[Anonymous No.7465532]

>>7465521
this
/thread

[Anonymous No.7465534]

>mods deleting posts because of their butthurt

wow

[Anonymous No.7465537]

>>7464548
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.7465559]

>>7464616
>-Metaphysics does not provide any substantial knowledge or wisdom.
>This is a metaphysical claim that rests on metaphysical arguments. The moment you make your case for this, you refute yourself.
no it's not, go back to your shitstain philosophy course, to say that refuting metaphysics is to make a statement of metaphysics is akin to saying that one uses words to refuting the use of words to describe a point, therefore defeating their own argument
tl;dr you're a retarded philosophag
>source: engineer master race

[Anonymous No.7465574]

>>7464548
>ITT: adolescents wishing to appear superior than their peers enrolled in philosophy classes for selfish reasons

[Anonymous No.7465595]

>>7465532
actually it's not you're both fucking retarded holy shit this is why I haven't been here since the start of the summer and also why I won't be back until the end

[Anonymous No.7465598]

>>7465595
No one will miss you, random angsty anon.

[Anonymous No.7465624]

>>7465559
>>source: engineer master race

[Anonymous No.7465640]

>>7464548
>Why is metaphysics largely rejected today?
it isn't, at least by most people. it's mostly accepted in philosophy and theology. not so much in science because it's not very useful in that regards.

[Anonymous No.7466084]

Metaphysics is the exploration of ideas that recide in the human mind, empiricism which is now the dominant heuristic process for scientific investigation is derived from the study of epistemology an area of metaphysics explored by Hume, Locke etc

[Anonymous No.7466088]

However metaphysics now has been dominated by other "social theories" and has taken on a ideological and political dimension, this is the morbid and dismissive philosophy which we have today.

[Anonymous No.7466182]

>>7465521
>theoretical physics is metaphysics
well shit, that is a strong point, why the change in names?

>google discussion on this
>people insist metaphysics is wishful thinking
>talk about theoretical physics and how they reach answers by describing, in so many words, the idea of a metaphysical demonstration

Shit why are sciencebabbys so fucking retarded to everything but mechanics.

[WOLFSHIEM !!tuOwy1ct2dy No.7466265]

>>7465559
>engineer can't into logic
Come the fuck on. Your comparison is not apt whatsoever. The words are the method in which an argument unrelated to words is transmitted, the idea of denying metaphysics on metaphysical ground involves making an argument that depends on the very grounds it denies.

If you take out words in making a point about using words you have an "unspoken point". If you take out the metaphysical claims in making a point about not using metaphysics to make points then you have demonstrably refuted yourself and did something stupid.

That is the issue with positivism.

[Anonymous No.7466287]

>>7466182
>well shit, that is a strong point, why the change in names?
theoretical physics is just the proposition of some causal mechanism of whatever experiments we like

[Anonymous No.7466630]

>>7466084
>empiricism which is now the dominant heuristic process for scientific investigation

No it's not dumbfuck, naturalism is a far more popular position than empiricism in both philosophy and science
>Who is Quine?

[Anonymous No.7466659]

>>7464548

Es gibt allerdings Unaussprechliches. Dies zeigt sich, es ist
das Mystische.

Die richtige Methode der Philosophie wäre eigentlich die:
Nichts zu sagen, als was sich sagen lässt, also Sätze der
Naturwissenschaft—also etwas, was mit Philosophie nichts
zu tun hat—, und dann immer, wenn ein anderer etwas
Metaphysisches sagen wollte, ihm nachzuweisen, dass er
gewissen Zeichen in seinen Sätzen keine Bedeutung gegeben
hat. Diese Methode wäre für den anderen unbefriedigend—er

hätte nicht das Gefühl, dass wir ihn Philosophie lehrten—aber
sie wäre die einzig streng richtige.

Meine Sätze erläutern dadurch, dass sie der, welcher mich ver-
steht, am Ende als unsinnig erkennt, wenn er durch sie—auf
ihnen—über sie hinausgestiegen ist. (Er muss sozusagen die
Leiter wegwerfen, nachdem er auf ihr hinaufgestiegen ist.)
Er muss diese Sätze überwinden, dann sieht er die Welt
richtig.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schw

[Anonymous No.7467144]

Why should one care about metaphysics though? It seems to be to be philosophy at its more esoteric. Most of it seems to be in the not even wrong category and doesn't actually explain how things are and just unnecesary complicated definitions of cause,existence,being,etc

Am I just a r/atheist fedora or do you get what I'm trying to say

Maybe its just because I bit a bit jaded because most of my experience withit comes from hack christian apologist reapidly saying "everything must have a cauze!!" to try to prove God but I don't see its value honestly.

[Anonymous No.7467195]

[Anonymous No.7467205]

>>7464548
>grounds in which metaphysics is denied it itself a metaphysical position
wat

[Anonymous No.7467570]

>>7467144
well your first step in philosophy would then be ''why do you care about explaining how things are and unnecesary complicated definitions of cause,existence,being,etc''

do you even have sketches of definitions of all the words that I quoted ?

[Muh Fractals No.7467575]

>>7466659
Aber nicht , was gezeigt wird zeigen, mehr als das, was gerechtfertigt ist ?

[Anonymous No.7467933]

>>7464548
It has a lot to do from the influence Wittgenstein had on philosophy. He argued that meaning of language consist of everyday or ordinary use of language and language-games (the language we actually engage in with other people). He said metaphysics was bloating symbols which could not be held upheld by philosophical theories, and was basically a waste of time. He did ironically state that in order to understand ordinary language we must do it from a metaphysical stand-point.

[Anonymous No.7467935]

>>7464572
/thread

[Anonymous No.7468175]

>>7465559
>>source: engineer master race
Calm down buddy, your "engineering" degree from that Middle-Eastern or Indian high school ain't a real engineering degree.

[Anonymous No.7469372]

>>7464548
Kant basically killed metaphysics