What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by RJG »

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:Do any of you agree with Nietzsche? Do any of you think that the nature of consciousness, physical stimuli and our senses are not actually sufficient to inform us about reality? I, for one, think that he was onto something in his writings. Of course our intellect appears to be clever and reflective of reality - of course our science and philosophy seem to be capable of progressing us toward truth. However, it could be the case that senses do nothing but create "images" of reality, and those "images" or "forms", as he put it, are what we speak of and are referring to when we speak of the universe.
Thamior, yes, I agree with you. ‘Subjective’ experiences cannot yield ‘objective’ truths.

We can only perceive ‘perceptions’, …not the ‘objects’ themselves that supposedly cause these perceptions. These objects (that cause the perceptions that we perceive) exist only as 'imaginations', ..and therefore can only be known through imagination, and pure speculation, ...and not with any certainty, or truth at all.

Since we are limited by (i.e. cannot perceive beyond) our perceptions/subjective experiences, we can never know if the object that we imagine, is actually real, or is a mirage, an illusion, a hallucination, a dream, or even exists at all. Therefore we cannot rely, nor trust, our subjective experiences to tell us the objective truths!

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:His writing actually reminds me a bit of Plato's Allegory of the Cave, to the degree that it doubts our very capacity to even know what truth is.
So, the real question should be, …is there a means of knowing truth ‘without’ the use of, and independent of, our non-trustworthy subjective experiences? In other words, can something be known as truth (i.e. with certainty)?

I think YES. ...what say you?
User avatar
ThamiorTheThinker
Posts: 281
Joined: October 21st, 2015, 9:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Yoda

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by ThamiorTheThinker »

RJG wrote:
ThamiorTheThinker wrote:His writing actually reminds me a bit of Plato's Allegory of the Cave, to the degree that it doubts our very capacity to even know what truth is.
So, the real question should be, …is there a means of knowing truth ‘without’ the use of, and independent of, our non-trustworthy subjective experiences? In other words, can something be known as truth (i.e. with certainty)?

I think YES. ...what say you?
What say I? I don't think so. I believe that truth, as we understand it, is all about semantics. If I say "this apple looks red", the truth-value of that statement, I argue, does not depend on a property of the apple, per se, but rather a property of meaning associated with internal subjective experiences of the apple and the color red simultaneously. In simpler terms, I'm assuming the opposite approach to truth-conditional semantics (TC). Let's call it reverse-TC semantics. Instead of viewing truth as reliant on itself and semantics stemming from truth, I think that our notion of truth is actually itself reliant on our semantics, however they come about.

I propose that subjective experiences provide the basis for our semantics. Take the example of the apple =. Saying "this apple is red" does not produce its own truth-value, rather the truth-value depends on the perception of the apple and my interpretation of color.

What other statements can reverse-TC semantics apply to? Mathematical statements, let's take as examples. In order to say that 2 + 2 = 4 is true - and may I remind you that many philosophers say this is a necessary truth, not a contingent one - I have to understand mathematical entities and how our logic applies to them. In order to obtain a truth-value from "2 + 2 = 4", I have to understand and construct a system of meaning and symbolism that refers and points to logical statements, then I have to determine whether or not those abstract logical statements consistent with each other. If by its definition the '2' on the left side of the addition symbol is distinct from the '2' on the right side of the addition sign, then the meaning of the statement changes and no longer has the same truth-value.

This is why truth is contingent and dependent upon semantics, I argue. How we define terms is how we are given "truth", not the other way around.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Rr6 »

1 triangle + 1 triangle = 4 triangles in 3D.

3 angles of triangle + 3 angles of triangle = 12 triangles in 3D.

rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s01/figs ... f0801.html

There exists five and only five regular/symmetrical polyhedra of "U"niverse.

Relatively easy to grasp, absolute truths.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by RJG »

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:
RJG wrote: So, the real question should be, …is there a means of knowing truth ‘without’ the use of, and independent of, our non-trustworthy subjective experiences? In other words, can something be known as truth (i.e. with certainty)?
I believe that truth, as we understand it, is all about semantics. …I propose that subjective experiences provide the basis for our semantics.
I don’t disagree that semantics are ‘downstream’ and contingent upon subjective experiences. But my question is whether truth can be found ‘upstream’ (prior to), or ‘independent’ of these subjective experiences.

For example, does ‘experiencing’ itself exist?, …is this a ‘truth’ that is ‘independent’ of its (non trustworthy) subjective content?

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:Take the example of the apple =. Saying "this apple is red" does not produce its own truth-value, rather the truth-value depends on the perception of the apple and my interpretation of color.
Yes, and again, the truth-value of 'subjective content' (and any other 'imaginations') cannot be known with certainty. The truth-value of these imaginations can only be 'speculated' at best, and therefore cannot be trusted to yield any ‘truths’.

In other words, let’s say we perceive this 'red-colored-apple'. We both agree that the subjective content; i.e. the ‘redness’ and the ‘apple itself’, exist purely in our (subjective) imagination. Since these exist as imagination, we therefore can ONLY ‘speculate’ of its realness. Therefore the existence of the red-colored-apple CANNOT be known as truth.

So, therefore, we can rule out 'subjective experiences' as a pathway to 'truth'. So what is left? Where do we go, how do we know something as true?

Now let me ask, ...can the “perceiving/experiencing" event itself (of this red-colored-apple perception) be known to be ‘true’? …is it 'independent' of its subjective content (...AND its resulting semantics!)?

If so, then 'something' can be known with truth/certainty!
User avatar
ThamiorTheThinker
Posts: 281
Joined: October 21st, 2015, 9:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Yoda

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by ThamiorTheThinker »

RJG wrote:
ThamiorTheThinker wrote: (Nested quote removed.)

I believe that truth, as we understand it, is all about semantics. …I propose that subjective experiences provide the basis for our semantics.
I don’t disagree that semantics are ‘downstream’ and contingent upon subjective experiences. But my question is whether truth can be found ‘upstream’ (prior to), or ‘independent’ of these subjective experiences.

For example, does ‘experiencing’ itself exist?, …is this a ‘truth’ that is ‘independent’ of its (non trustworthy) subjective content?

One could say that experience is indeed an existent thing or result of things. I cannot deny that experiences are happening.
ThamiorTheThinker wrote:Take the example of the apple =. Saying "this apple is red" does not produce its own truth-value, rather the truth-value depends on the perception of the apple and my interpretation of color.
Yes, and again, the truth-value of 'subjective content' (and any other 'imaginations') cannot be known with certainty. The truth-value of these imaginations can only be 'speculated' at best, and therefore cannot be trusted to yield any ‘truths’.

In other words, let’s say we perceive this 'red-colored-apple'. We both agree that the subjective content; i.e. the ‘redness’ and the ‘apple itself’, exist purely in our (subjective) imagination. Since these exist as imagination, we therefore can ONLY ‘speculate’ of its realness. Therefore the existence of the red-colored-apple CANNOT be known as truth.

So, therefore, we can rule out 'subjective experiences' as a pathway to 'truth'. So what is left? Where do we go, how do we know something as true?

Now let me ask, ...can the “perceiving/experiencing" event itself (of this red-colored-apple perception) be known to be ‘true’? …is it 'independent' of its subjective content (...AND its resulting semantics!)?

If so, then 'something' can be known with truth/certainty!
Those are all fantastic questions to ask, and they are exactly my point. You essentially restated what I wrote - don't know if that was your intention or not.

If there are independently existing things, 'truths' as you call them, you would be right in saying that we cannot 'know' them. Frankly, I'm not sure how to respond to this idea that truths exist, because existence is a loosely defined term, as is independence. Perhaps try defining those two terms and then restating these last few statements?

-- Updated April 25th, 2016, 4:24 pm to add the following --

**rewording, not restating.
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by RJG »

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:Those are all fantastic questions to ask, and they are exactly my point. You essentially restated what I wrote - don't know if that was your intention or not.
Yes, I did some extra re-stating/embellishing of your words, so as to let you know that I totally agree with you here on this point (…that subjective experiences cannot yield true knowledge).

BUT, where I disagree is the claim that “we cannot know truth”.

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:I cannot deny that experiences are happening.
So then you affirm that experiencing happens? If so, then isn't this is a bit of ‘true’ knowledge? …an absolute, undeniable truth? ...one that is not dependent on subjective content, or semantics? …one that cannot be denied, without further affirming it?

If so, then voila, …we have a known truth, …we know something with certainty, …we possess a bit of ‘true’ knowledge!!!

That was my only point. Otherwise, I’m in agreement with you.
User avatar
ThamiorTheThinker
Posts: 281
Joined: October 21st, 2015, 9:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Yoda

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by ThamiorTheThinker »

Well played, RJG. Well played, indeed.

-- Updated April 25th, 2016, 7:00 pm to add the following --

Though, we haven't really established much beyond "Cogito Ergo Sum". I was trying to move past that into newer ideas. I'll get back to you once I find away to formalize in language what I was meaning to actually discuss beyond what Descartes already established.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Rr6 »

I think about some thing ( finger/occupied space ) with a something ( brain/occupied space ) ergo I exist....r6

Metaphysica-1, mind/intellect/concept,
....spirit-1 spirit-of-intent.....


Metaphiscal-2, macro-infinite non-occupied space,

Metaphysical-3, spirit-3, gravity,

Metaphysical-4. spirit-4, dark energy.

( >< )( >< ) shape of space-time-space

>< can also represent dumbbell shape of atom as found in one Fullers many jitterbug/vector equilibrium exotic configurations of space. See shape of atom at higher energies link for more understanding.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... -of-atoms/

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
pekin
Posts: 78
Joined: November 25th, 2008, 5:00 pm
Location: London

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by pekin »

Excaljnur wrote:1) What does metaphysics tell us about the world?
2) How do you know these metaphysical facts are not merely conceptual truths devoid of empirical verification?
This is the questions and one possible answer seems to be:
Togo1 wrote:It [Metaphysics] tells you what assumptions you have made to reach your present conception of the world, and what the consequences would be if those turned out to be false, or if different ones were adopted.

Metaphysics isn't supposed to give you facts, it's supposed to give you logical operators with which to dissect and understand your facts, in the same way that logic and mathematics do. Maths tells you nothing at all about the real world, but it's very very handy when you want to logically extrapolate one measurement to another.
This is an answer in the theory of knowledge [Epistemology], but still only a half of the answer if we accept the definition of Metaphysics in philosophy is that it is a branch of philosophy with two sub-branches: A- Ontology [theory of existence] and B- Epistemology [theory of knowledge].

One thing is very useful to remember is Plato's theory of knowledge: "Knowledge is justified true belief".

The other half of the answer to the original question is to do with the theory of existence [Ontology] is supposed to answer to the question "What actually exist?".

Logically the most convincing answer seems to be in Descartes' Cogito argument with the conclusion "I think therefore I am" .

What this sub-branch of metaphysics [Ontology] tells us is extremely important but there is no basis in logic to claim all sorts of material and non-materials existence in universe.

We only assume material [mesurable] existence, space and time, it is very important to us, but the study of the nature of material existence is the job for scientific community rather than philosophers.
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13821
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Belinda »

Ontology is important because each theory of existence yields ethics . Ethics are concerned in morality such that the ethics we choose express who we are, or at least what we are predisposed to be.

Ontology does not tell us about the world, for that we depend upon empirical methods. However ontology helps us to understand what our human world ought to be.
Socialist
User avatar
Henry
New Trial Member
Posts: 2
Joined: February 10th, 2017, 11:54 pm

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Henry »

A subjectory response is a decision based on a determination of a base. Therefore the act of energy used in the determination itself is the actual beginning of the true base
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Rr6 »

Those who talk about metaphysics, without having a common set of definitions they agree upon is like those who try to talk about God, wherein they all have different definitions-- most lacking rational, logical common sense ---ergo they speak past each other as if both are speaking gibberish, with only some overlap common concepts being communicated, if any.

r6
Rr6 wrote:I think about some thing ( finger/occupied space ) with a something ( brain/occupied space ) ergo I exist....r6
Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concept,
....spirit-1 spirit-of-intent.....

Metaphiscal-2, macro-infinite non-occupied space,
Metaphysical-3, spirit-3, gravity,
Metaphysical-4. spirit-4, dark energy.
( >< )( >< ) shape of space-time-space
>< can also represent dumbbell shape of atom as found in one Fullers many jitterbug/vector equilibrium exotic configurations of space. See shape of atom at higher energies link for more understanding.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... -of-atoms/

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
User avatar
Henry
New Trial Member
Posts: 2
Joined: February 10th, 2017, 11:54 pm

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Henry »

Yes. Very cool but infinity is an impossibility
Energy cannot be exactly parallel to space so at somepoint in time it will intersect with what we call space. There will be a exhaustion of space
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Rr6 »

Henry wrote:Yes. Very cool but infinity is an impossibility
Energy cannot be exactly parallel to space so at somepoint in time it will intersect with what we call space. There will be a exhaustion of space
There will be a limit to volumetric amount of occupied space.

Outside of our finite, occupied space Universe, exists macro-infinite non-occupied space.

These is such a simple concept yet few can grasp, much less acknowledge this rational, logical common sense conclusion.

What is harder to rationalize away is micro-infinite occupied space i.e. and occupied space Universe, that, eternally subdividing itself ergo micro-infinite subdivision is inferred, or implied.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
Togo1
Posts: 541
Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 9:52 am

Re: What does metaphysics tell us about the world?

Post by Togo1 »

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:
Togo1 wrote: Well I think we need to be careful of your metaphor of 'pushing past' perceptions. Perception may or may not be relevant, but it needs to be accounted for either way. I don't think that metaphysics that defies our perceptions without explanation ends up being particularly credible. For example, it's easy to talk breezily about a sense of self being an illusion, but the actual mechanics that would be required to produce such an illusion, to keep it consistent and credible, would be immensely complicated, and the utility of doing so is very doubtful. That's all science, which means it's based on our (fallible, doubtful) perceptions of the world, but it's still important. Claiming our perceptions are inaccurate is not an out, allowing us to ignore those perceptions. It means that your metaphysical model has to explain both our perceptions and whatever reality is proposed that we can't properly perceive.
I'm not so sure that the mechanics of an illusion of self are that complex. The brain perceives and takes in data from various senses, filters it through various processes and creates an ongoing, internal subjective sequence of experiences. The self arises from these senses, our memories and the ability to think and use cognition to create internal monologues.[/quoite]

Eh, but why does it create an ongoing, internal subjective sequence of experiences? What are the requirement for these set of experiences? Why do they create a sense of decision making and agency? How is conscious reasoning, which appears to make decisions based on a fairly complicated set of criteria and reasons, sometimes over a long period of time, so closely correlated with the actual process of decision making that we can mistake the product of one for the product of the other? What possible reason would there be for maintaining two parallel processes, only one of which is effective? Given that neural processing is quite expensive in terms of energy budget, why has conscious thought not been eliminated, if it really isn't functional? If it is functional, why isn't it used to make decisions? Why does decision making cease in absence of conscious thought, but not in the absence of sense information? Why do apparently conscious and apparently unconscious processes have different performance characteristics?

It's not impossible for the government to have faked the moon landings, and painstakingly arranged things so we only think it happened. But the reason why people dismiss such conspiracy theories is because it's a vast amount of effort for no clear purpose, and there's no evidence whatsoever to believe that such fakery took place. If we propose a conspiracy of the brain, we have the same hurdle. Why all this effort, to what purpose, and why has no evidence been found?
ThamiorTheThinker wrote:But, turning away from the neuroscience, there's already a philosophical problem with saying that there is a "self" to which an individual may refer. What in your mind can you point to and say "that is me"?
The thing that's making the statement and asking that question?

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:If you were devoid of perception, thoughts, senses and a body, would your brain still produce a disembodied core or self? That is, are our senses, perceptions what create "us" or is there an extra thing which we can point to in reference to ourselves?
Why would we need an extra thing? Or anything diembodied? I'm not ruling it out, but it's not really necessary for a sense of self to be real, and conscious decisions to be actual decisions.
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021