How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Angelo Cannata wrote: June 15th, 2022, 3:52 pm I depends how we interpret his words “'The branch of philosophy that attempts to construct a general, speculative worldview; a complete, systematic account of all reality and experience”. How can metaphysics be “complete” without being static? Doesn’t “general” mean universal? How can it be universal without being absolute, that is, independent from opinions? How can it be a complete account of all reality without being absolutely certain, not exposed to any doubt?
Personally, I took "general" to mean 'not-specific', and maybe 'not-precise' too. But not "universal". Maybe I was wrong.

As for "complete", I take your point. But what if Palmer intended his metaphysics to be a complete account of life, the universe and everything, when the latter is (and has always been, as far as we know) in a state of continuous change?

Given that Palmer states in his definition that metaphysics is speculative, can we assume he referred to a speculative "account of reality", not one which is Objectively (and statically) correct?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Cools
New Trial Member
Posts: 2
Joined: June 16th, 2022, 12:59 am

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by Cools »

The only answers you can get regard "compatibility" and are thus circular. To get your answer, you must come back to the consciousness debate. The Metaphysical-foundation is based upon the presumption that consciousness is, at least partially, of infinite nature, contrary to the finite nature of physics. This is directly relative to the "Descartian" theories. Descartes attributed such nature to God, which there is no direct proof of, but the apparent fundamental disconnect between the physical world and consciousness is the important part. If consciousness is of infinite nature then the correct foundation of Philosophy may only be a metaphysical one. If you believe that consciousness is of finite nature, then the metaphysical foundation of Philosophy is simply incompatible with your beliefs.

The answer is that the Metaphysical foundation is either fundamentally important to Philosophy, or totally irrelevant, at least from a moral perspective, as ethics are a bit more malleable.
snt
Posts: 110
Joined: June 2nd, 2022, 4:43 am

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by snt »

JackDaydream wrote: June 14th, 2022, 7:29 pm It may be that speculation is queried by some, but even with science there is a need for thinking conceptually to formulate hypotheses and to interpret the findings. However, metaphysics as a way of constructing a worldview may be central to all else, including ideas about morality and politics. So, how useful is a basic metaphysics for thinking about how we live, and as a foundation for values and ethics?
Interesting topic!

It seems that the drive towards an enforcement of a focus on empirical has been a highly moral one, but also one that was done from a primitive state of the world after which society was just about breaking free from religions.

From a simple perspective: what else than of empirical reality can it be said that it has been an 'intended good'? Close adherence to empirical reality - the practice of science - is therefore a highly moral one in my opinion. This idea - the interest of human progress at a certain point in time - might have motivated some philosophers in early times to steer to an extreme focus on empirical.

It is important however to keep in mind the caveman perspective. Humans figuratively speaking started out of a cave and making progress sufficiently fast might be perceived as the highest and most critical interest, especially in the era in which science made its start.

Today however, it is a different world with diverse different outlooks and interests. The caveman style - blind brute force attempt - on making progress might not be the best option today, especially with new risks such as exponential growth.

Thinking about the fundamental nature of aspects - metaphysics - is naturally to become of critical importance again and one area in which it would serve is morality (ethics as formal variant created by specialists to guide human's socially).
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3218
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by JackDaydream »

Cools wrote: June 16th, 2022, 1:53 am The only answers you can get regard "compatibility" and are thus circular. To get your answer, you must come back to the consciousness debate. The Metaphysical-foundation is based upon the presumption that consciousness is, at least partially, of infinite nature, contrary to the finite nature of physics. This is directly relative to the "Descartian" theories. Descartes attributed such nature to God, which there is no direct proof of, but the apparent fundamental disconnect between the physical world and consciousness is the important part. If consciousness is of infinite nature then the correct foundation of Philosophy may only be a metaphysical one. If you believe that consciousness is of finite nature, then the metaphysical foundation of Philosophy is simply incompatible with your beliefs.

The answer is that the Metaphysical foundation is either fundamentally important to Philosophy, or totally irrelevant, at least from a moral perspective, as ethics are a bit more malleable.
You are right to argue that the question of metaphysics is either essential to philosophy or not relevant at all, which may be a paradox. It does seem that it is probably related to whether God exists, or some kind of spiritual forces behind appearances. Kant's own metaphysics did have a big emphasis on the empirical but did incorporate the idea of God as well. Even Hegel emphasised the idea of spirit as an aspect underlying history, even though there was not a supernatural component to his arguments.

So, it may be that the idea of metaphysics is about whether there is anything beyond appearances. It seems more about that than simply whether God exists. Buddhist philosophy seems to even be of mixed opinion here. It is hard to know whether it is just about the question of materialism because it is possible to believe in the psychological experience of consciousness as a reality but not attribute it to any higher force. So, it may be down to the question of what is the source of consciousness?

Definitely, whether there are deeper levels of reality behind consciousness is bound up with ethics because it is about understanding how reality works and human nature. It also can be seen as related to the question which Gauguin posed in the title of his famous painting,
'Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?'
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Cools wrote: June 16th, 2022, 1:53 am The Metaphysical-foundation is based upon the presumption that consciousness is, at least partially, of infinite nature, contrary to the finite nature of physics.
Interesting. 👍 I wonder if a different perspective might add something new?

Physics is physically finite. Its subject is wholly physical, comprising length, breadth, and height. While metaphysics does not consider the purely-physical at all, and so it is strictly true to say that it is 'infinite', in the sense that it is not limited by length, or any physical property. But metaphysics is not really infinite, but only dissociated from physicality. Its area of relevance is not defined or limited physically. That isn't really what we would mean by 'infinite', is it? 🤔
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

snt wrote: June 16th, 2022, 4:37 am Close adherence to empirical reality - the practice of science - is therefore a highly moral one in my opinion.
That's interesting, because in my opinion, adherence to empirical reality, exclusively, excludes morality entirely. Morality has no empirical, or physical (in the sense of physics), existence. I would suggest that close adherence to empirical reality is amoral. How could it be otherwise?

Morality is invisible/undetectable to science.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3218
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by JackDaydream »

snt wrote: June 16th, 2022, 4:37 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 14th, 2022, 7:29 pm It may be that speculation is queried by some, but even with science there is a need for thinking conceptually to formulate hypotheses and to interpret the findings. However, metaphysics as a way of constructing a worldview may be central to all else, including ideas about morality and politics. So, how useful is a basic metaphysics for thinking about how we live, and as a foundation for values and ethics?
Interesting topic!

It seems that the drive towards an enforcement of a focus on empirical has been a highly moral one, but also one that was done from a primitive state of the world after which society was just about breaking free from religions.

From a simple perspective: what else than of empirical reality can it be said that it has been an 'intended good'? Close adherence to empirical reality - the practice of science - is therefore a highly moral one in my opinion. This idea - the interest of human progress at a certain point in time - might have motivated some philosophers in early times to steer to an extreme focus on empirical.

It is important however to keep in mind the caveman perspective. Humans figuratively speaking started out of a cave and making progress sufficiently fast might be perceived as the highest and most critical interest, especially in the era in which science made its start.

Today however, it is a different world with diverse different outlooks and interests. The caveman style - blind brute force attempt - on making progress might not be the best option today, especially with new risks such as exponential growth.

Thinking about the fundamental nature of aspects - metaphysics - is naturally to become of critical importance again and one area in which it would serve is morality (ethics as formal variant created by specialists to guide human's socially).
The gradual shift towards the empirical rather than the metaphysical definitely seems to be one which is interconnected to the move towards secular as opposed to religious perspectives. It may be more about whether one believes in life after death as much as about God because the idea of being punished or rewarded by God in a life after death is often important. The main gist seems to be that if there is no God punishing or rewarding human beings human beings are the judges of their own actions. Conscience may be important but it is more bound up with human values and, as Nietszche said, 'If God is dead, all is permitted'.

Even if it the metaphysics of morality is rejected it is still worth being aware of the way in which the history of the development of morality still emerged in accordance with belief systems, going back to the original ideas about magic. The earliest people saw reality and causation in such a different way to the way in which human beings do currently. Mostly, people understand life in technicalities related to the material world. For example, when people get sick they are likely to visit doctors to identify the nature of the problem as opposed to seeing it as being based on the supernatural. This means that life is seen as involving technical problems and ethics is related to thinking of managing resources and weighing up cost and benefits of addressing the identified problems.
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3218
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by JackDaydream »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 16th, 2022, 9:36 am
snt wrote: June 16th, 2022, 4:37 am Close adherence to empirical reality - the practice of science - is therefore a highly moral one in my opinion.
That's interesting, because in my opinion, adherence to empirical reality, exclusively, excludes morality entirely. Morality has no empirical, or physical (in the sense of physics), existence. I would suggest that close adherence to empirical reality is amoral. How could it be otherwise?

Morality is invisible/undetectable to science.
The idea of 'a close adherence to empirical reality is amoral' is debatable because that is where the inner and outer aspects of morality come into play. Most people would probably take the view that the attention to the empirical is the main focus for morality, that is because in most circumstances it is the consequences of action which are seen as being the main criteria. Current thinking is often in terms of the language of disaster management and risk assessment. This applies in government policies as well as aspects of medical ethics.

The move has been one away from moralising towards an emphasis on results, although the interplay is the way in which this is based on values. The sources of values, individually and socially, are connected to the inner construction of what matters in life.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

JackDaydream wrote: June 14th, 2022, 7:29 pm I have been thinking about this after reading an essay by Iris Murdoch, 'A House of Theory', in the volume of her writings, 'Existentialists and Mystics: Writings on Philosophy and Literature'(1997). She describes a void and a need for 'A House of Theory' as there has been an increasing tendency towards an 'elimination of metaphysics'. A key passage from the essay which I wish to offer as a source for thought and contemplation is as follows,
'In the past philosophers have invented concepts expressive of moral belief and presented them as if they are were facts concerning the nature of the mind or of the world. Philosophy since Hume has, in opposing dogmatic rationalist metaphysics in general, been critical of this tendency, but in varying ways. Briefly, criticism of metaphysics may proceed along Humian, Kantian, or Hegelian lines. Hume, who wished to maintain as rigorously as possible that we know only what our senses tell us, denied the existence of moral "facts" or "realities", analysed moral concepts into non-rational feelings and imaginative habits, and was prepared to let basic empirical empirical concepts suffer the same fate.
Kant, anxious to defend both the reality of our empirical knowledge and the dignity of our moral imagination into "categories", or fixed formal modes of apprehension which if directed upon empirical data would yield knowledge'.

What I find significant is the way in which Murdoch sees Kant, Hume and Hegel as so important in a move towards the empirical, which is much greater in the twentieth first century. It seems rather paradoxical that the writers she sees as important as eliminating former metaphysics have almost been rejected for being too metaphysical. Of course, there has been Wittgenstein's critique of the limits of language in understanding, as well as the movement of logical positivism. In addition, there has been the postmodern movement, with its deconstruction of language and meanings.

So, my purpose is to consider what is the importance of metaphysics in philosophy of the present time. I am aware that there is the underlying question of what is metaphysics, and that there was a thread on that topic previously. So, I will give a working definition from Donald Palmer's 'Looking at Philosophy: The Unbearable Heaviness of Philosophy Made Lighter'. He defines metaphysics as, 'The branch of philosophy that attempts to construct a general, speculative worldview; a complete, systematic account of all reality and experience, usually involving an epistemology, an ontology, an ethics and an aesthetics.

It may be that speculation is queried by some, but even with science there is a need for thinking conceptually to formulate hypotheses and to interpret the findings. However, metaphysics as a way of constructing a worldview may be central to all else, including ideas about morality and politics. So, how useful is a basic metaphysics for thinking about how we live, and as a foundation for values and ethics?
Hello Jack!

Hume, ironically enough, recognized the metaphysic's of conscious existence. In his Treatise of Human Nature, he woefully conceded to the metaphysic's of the Will (and related human sentient desires) hence:

Hume held that passions rather than reason govern human behaviour, famously proclaiming that "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions."[12][14] Hume was also a sentimentalist who held that ethics are based on emotion or sentiment rather than abstract moral principle.

One could then interprete that as him being a Voluntarist. For example, in cognitive science:

Voluntaristic theories of psychology represent men primarily as beings who will certain ends and whose reason and intelligence are subordinate to will. The outstanding classical representatives are Thomas Hobbes, David Hume, and Arthur Schopenhauer.

And so, he's suggesting the Will takes primacy over reason. He recognized that particular piece of the existential human condition. My personal view is that it is an illogical mix of both (logic and will) but I agree it's more Will than logic. And that's primarily due to choice and the intrinsic need for happiness and purpose. The Will to be, is something beyond mere instinct to live. Our volition allows us to live, or not live. Quality (Qualia) of life matters.

Metaphysic's seem to matter after all... LOL
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 16th, 2022, 9:36 am
snt wrote: June 16th, 2022, 4:37 am Close adherence to empirical reality - the practice of science - is therefore a highly moral one in my opinion.
That's interesting, because in my opinion, adherence to empirical reality, exclusively, excludes morality entirely. Morality has no empirical, or physical (in the sense of physics), existence. I would suggest that close adherence to empirical reality is amoral. How could it be otherwise?

Morality is invisible/undetectable to science.
JackDaydream wrote: June 16th, 2022, 10:02 am The idea of 'a close adherence to empirical reality is amoral' is debatable because that is where the inner and outer aspects of morality come into play. Most people would probably take the view that the attention to the empirical is the main focus for morality, that is because in most circumstances it is the consequences of action which are seen as being the main criteria. Current thinking is often in terms of the language of disaster management and risk assessment. This applies in government policies as well as aspects of medical ethics.

The move has been one away from moralising towards an emphasis on results, although the interplay is the way in which this is based on values. The sources of values, individually and socially, are connected to the inner construction of what matters in life.
My point was that an exclusive adherence to empirical reality would mean that morality - not an empirical 'thing' - would never be encountered. Hence amoral, not "immoral".
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
snt
Posts: 110
Joined: June 2nd, 2022, 4:43 am

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by snt »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 16th, 2022, 9:36 am
snt wrote: June 16th, 2022, 4:37 am Close adherence to empirical reality - the practice of science - is therefore a highly moral one in my opinion.
That's interesting, because in my opinion, adherence to empirical reality, exclusively, excludes morality entirely. Morality has no empirical, or physical (in the sense of physics), existence. I would suggest that close adherence to empirical reality is amoral. How could it be otherwise?

Morality is invisible/undetectable to science.
It were religions that addressed morality and they abused the nature of it for diverse reasons. From that perspective, close adherence to empirical reality as a humble observant could be considered a highly moral practice at that point in time.

Ethical rules and politics are empirical in nature and therefore a close adherence to empirical reality would shift control over morality towards independent scientists and philosophers.

Further, with regard close adherence to empirical reality to be actually moral. There is a good to be found in the cosmos as a whole. The good of what has become ('intended good' or truth) and a good of which the human is a tiny humble part. In the face of such a reality, the practice of being a humble observer - the practice of science - can be considered a highly moral one.

I agree with you that true morality is not empirical in nature. From my perspective morality is eternal in nature (an eternal quest for good in the face of an unknown future) and that concerns an a priori aspect that would make 'good' possible. From a cultural perspective, true morality is especially important in social/environmental relations compared with empirical ethics. However, the good that already is in the cosmos is still a good and the discovery of that good can be considered a moral practice.

The discovery of good is what morality is ultimately all about. When it concerns science however, one is neglecting the question whether a certain scientific discovery practice is 'good' since science would - humbly - only address the good that already has become while morality - using an a priori or metaphysical aspect - would address a good that 'ought' to become.
snt
Posts: 110
Joined: June 2nd, 2022, 4:43 am

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by snt »

JackDaydream wrote: June 16th, 2022, 9:42 amIThe gradual shift towards the empirical rather than the metaphysical definitely seems to be one which is interconnected to the move towards secular as opposed to religious perspectives. It may be more about whether one believes in life after death as much as about God because the idea of being punished or rewarded by God in a life after death is often important. The main gist seems to be that if there is no God punishing or rewarding human beings human beings are the judges of their own actions. Conscience may be important but it is more bound up with human values and, as Nietszche said, 'If God is dead, all is permitted'.

Even if it the metaphysics of morality is rejected it is still worth being aware of the way in which the history of the development of morality still emerged in accordance with belief systems, going back to the original ideas about magic. The earliest people saw reality and causation in such a different way to the way in which human beings do currently. Mostly, people understand life in technicalities related to the material world. For example, when people get sick they are likely to visit doctors to identify the nature of the problem as opposed to seeing it as being based on the supernatural. This means that life is seen as involving technical problems and ethics is related to thinking of managing resources and weighing up cost and benefits of addressing the identified problems.
Thank you for your perspective!

I just read a personal interview with Deepak Chopra and his struggle to introduce integrated medicine in health care. He was rejected and looked down upon while today, integrated medicine is a standard part of most hospitals in USA (despite not 'true' according to Deepak Chopra).

With integrated medicine, a step is made towards accepting metaphysical explanations and initiatives for restoring and maintaining health. Some variants of Yoga for example, are based on ancient ideas about mind, physical reality and body health.

What is your personal opinion on today's perception of metaphysics, morality and health care? Do you believe that something should change, if so, why/how?
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

snt wrote: June 16th, 2022, 11:15 am Ethical rules and politics are empirical in nature...
No, I don't think they are. Ethical rules and politics are abstract, not empirical. They are human social creations, although their application might well have empirically-detectable consequences.

Empirical adjective - Relying on or derived from observation or experiment; Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment; Guided by practical experience and not theory (especially in medicine).
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

snt wrote: June 16th, 2022, 11:15 am The discovery of good is what morality is ultimately all about.
I have always thought that morality referred to how each one of us treats others. Other humans, and probably other living things too.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3218
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: How Important is Metaphysics as a Foundation for Philosophy and Ethics?

Post by JackDaydream »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 16th, 2022, 10:15 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 14th, 2022, 7:29 pm I have been thinking about this after reading an essay by Iris Murdoch, 'A House of Theory', in the volume of her writings, 'Existentialists and Mystics: Writings on Philosophy and Literature'(1997). She describes a void and a need for 'A House of Theory' as there has been an increasing tendency towards an 'elimination of metaphysics'. A key passage from the essay which I wish to offer as a source for thought and contemplation is as follows,
'In the past philosophers have invented concepts expressive of moral belief and presented them as if they are were facts concerning the nature of the mind or of the world. Philosophy since Hume has, in opposing dogmatic rationalist metaphysics in general, been critical of this tendency, but in varying ways. Briefly, criticism of metaphysics may proceed along Humian, Kantian, or Hegelian lines. Hume, who wished to maintain as rigorously as possible that we know only what our senses tell us, denied the existence of moral "facts" or "realities", analysed moral concepts into non-rational feelings and imaginative habits, and was prepared to let basic empirical empirical concepts suffer the same fate.
Kant, anxious to defend both the reality of our empirical knowledge and the dignity of our moral imagination into "categories", or fixed formal modes of apprehension which if directed upon empirical data would yield knowledge'.

What I find significant is the way in which Murdoch sees Kant, Hume and Hegel as so important in a move towards the empirical, which is much greater in the twentieth first century. It seems rather paradoxical that the writers she sees as important as eliminating former metaphysics have almost been rejected for being too metaphysical. Of course, there has been Wittgenstein's critique of the limits of language in understanding, as well as the movement of logical positivism. In addition, there has been the postmodern movement, with its deconstruction of language and meanings.

So, my purpose is to consider what is the importance of metaphysics in philosophy of the present time. I am aware that there is the underlying question of what is metaphysics, and that there was a thread on that topic previously. So, I will give a working definition from Donald Palmer's 'Looking at Philosophy: The Unbearable Heaviness of Philosophy Made Lighter'. He defines metaphysics as, 'The branch of philosophy that attempts to construct a general, speculative worldview; a complete, systematic account of all reality and experience, usually involving an epistemology, an ontology, an ethics and an aesthetics.

It may be that speculation is queried by some, but even with science there is a need for thinking conceptually to formulate hypotheses and to interpret the findings. However, metaphysics as a way of constructing a worldview may be central to all else, including ideas about morality and politics. So, how useful is a basic metaphysics for thinking about how we live, and as a foundation for values and ethics?
Hello Jack!

Hume, ironically enough, recognized the metaphysic's of conscious existence. In his Treatise of Human Nature, he woefully conceded to the metaphysic's of the Will (and related human sentient desires) hence:

Hume held that passions rather than reason govern human behaviour, famously proclaiming that "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions."[12][14] Hume was also a sentimentalist who held that ethics are based on emotion or sentiment rather than abstract moral principle.

One could then interprete that as him being a Voluntarist. For example, in cognitive science:

Voluntaristic theories of psychology represent men primarily as beings who will certain ends and whose reason and intelligence are subordinate to will. The outstanding classical representatives are Thomas Hobbes, David Hume, and Arthur Schopenhauer.

And so, he's suggesting the Will takes primacy over reason. He recognized that particular piece of the existential human condition. My personal view is that it is an illogical mix of both (logic and will) but I agree it's more Will than logic. And that's primarily due to choice and the intrinsic need for happiness and purpose. The Will to be, is something beyond mere instinct to live. Our volition allows us to live, or not live. Quality (Qualia) of life matters.

Metaphysic's seem to matter after all... LOL
The relationship of Will and human nature to metaphysics is an important area. I do have a copy of Hume's Treatise on Human Nature, which I have been meaning to read for some while, so I will try to have a read of that later today and see how that fits into this thread topic.

Regarding Schopenhauer it is hard to know where he stands as a metaphysician. He brought Kant's ideas down to human experiences. I was reading of his ideas recently in Alasdair MacIntyre's 'A Short History of Ethics', in which he interprets Schopenhauer in the following way,
'The world is the expression of blind striving or Will. We know our own inner nature as Will in direct experience; thought is but one of the outward forms or direct disguises taken by Will. Life is blind, cruel and meaningless; but we cling to life through extremes of pain and suffering. The natural world bears witness to the continuous reproduction of the species, and the continuous destruction of the individual. The forms remain the same; the individuals who exemplify them continually perish. (In this we get a hint of Schopenhauer's relation to Plato and Kant.) Thus experience testifies to the way in which the world is pervaded by pain and destruction, while religion and philosophy try to construct justifications for the universe which will show that pain and destruction have not the last word, and in so doing, they testify to the force of Cosmic Will, which has its aim the continuing existence of this desire for for continued existence.'

It seems as if the Schopenhauer's picture of reality, or Will, is far more in line with what Darwin describes as ' the survival as the fittest', with its emphasis on the fight for survival in it's most grim form. Of course, Schopenhauer is recognised as having a pessimistic approach. It probably does involve a choice about volition and a will to live, which has both a conscious and subconscious aspect, as well as the gravitation towards happiness.

It may connect to Freud's understanding of the Eros and Thanatos, and how this works as an energy force beyond the individual psyche. It is hard to work out to what extent we act or are acted upon by external forces, especially in relation to the concepts of good and evil, which were traditionally seen as metaphysical forces but more commonly seen as human constructs. This probably applies to all the opposites, and gets back to the issue of qualia, with the question of how experiences tie up with the nature of reality as experienced by conscious beings. Many discussions of consciousnes focus on the nature of neuroscience and the physical technicalities, but where science, including physics, is not able to explain fully, it may bring back some of the gaps and the basic questions of metaphysics as ones which still prevail.
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

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