That's what I was trying to say in the original post.
This makes me think about what happened in Yugoslavia.
That's what I was trying to say in the original post.
This makes me think about what happened in Yugoslavia.
On the contrary, many of the topics that metaphysics addresses are not the sort of issues where facts and absolutes feature much, if at all. These are topics where justified conclusions are rare, sometimes actually impossible. If there is benefit to metaphysics — and I definitely think there is! — it is in the journey, not the destination, which is rarely reached. But we can learn much on the way, which is the point of metaphysics, I think?
I'd even go beyond that to say that the metaphysical is what's left over after you remove the factual.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑September 4th, 2022, 9:42 amOn the contrary, many of the topics that metaphysics addresses are not the sort of issues where facts and absolutes feature much, if at all. These are topics where justified conclusions are rare, sometimes actually impossible. If there is benefit to metaphysics — and I definitely think there is! — it is in the journey, not the destination, which is rarely reached. But we can learn much on the way, which is the point of metaphysics, I think?
Well then, I have to ask, do you think that metaphysics should be based on subjects and relations instead of particulars and universals?Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑September 4th, 2022, 9:42 amOn the contrary, many of the topics that metaphysics addresses are not the sort of issues where facts and absolutes feature much, if at all. These are topics where justified conclusions are rare, sometimes actually impossible. If there is benefit to metaphysics — and I definitely think there is! — it is in the journey, not the destination, which is rarely reached. But we can learn much on the way, which is the point of metaphysics, I think?
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑September 4th, 2022, 9:42 am On the contrary, many of the topics that metaphysics addresses are not the sort of issues where facts and absolutes feature much, if at all. These are topics where justified conclusions are rare, sometimes actually impossible. If there is benefit to metaphysics — and I definitely think there is! — it is in the journey, not the destination, which is rarely reached. But we can learn much on the way, which is the point of metaphysics, I think?
Given that "particulars and universals" seem to refer to empirical evidence — something often lacking (or absent) in metaphysical discussions — I suppose it would have to be the former?
One would think it would have to be the former but it isn't. Academic metaphysics is based on particulars and universals. If it were based on subjects and relations instead, then metaphysics would be a system that we are already in. We all are subjects and we all have relatives. That doesn't work with particulars and universals. The fossil record is the evidence. That would make metaphysics conform with evolution. As you might see it goes on from there. It would also be the end of nihilism which is defined as there is no system.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑September 5th, 2022, 6:44 am Given that "particulars and universals" seem to refer to empirical evidence — something often lacking (or absent) in metaphysical discussions — I suppose it would have to be the former?
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑September 5th, 2022, 6:44 am Given that "particulars and universals" seem to refer to empirical evidence — something often lacking (or absent) in metaphysical discussions — I suppose it would have to be the former?
It seems we have some very different ideas about what metaphysics is, to the extent that communication between us is nigh on impossible, on this topic, at least. Sorry.JHuber wrote: ↑September 6th, 2022, 7:43 am One would think it would have to be the former but it isn't. Academic metaphysics is based on particulars and universals. If it were based on subjects and relations instead, then metaphysics would be a system that we are already in. We all are subjects and we all have relatives. That doesn't work with particulars and universals. The fossil record is the evidence. That would make metaphysics conform with evolution. As you might see it goes on from there. It would also be the end of nihilism which is defined as there is no system.
How would you go about doing that?
No, you were on about academic whatever. I meant, what practical steps, taken by real people, in the real world, where 84% of the population subscribe to a religion, would you take, or could anyone take, to de-legitimize religion?That's what I was trying to say in the original post.
Agreed.Alias wrote: ↑September 6th, 2022, 11:37 pm No, you were on about academic whatever. I meant, what practical steps, taken by real people, in the real world, where 84% of the population subscribe to a religion, would you take, or could anyone take, to de-legitimize religion?
You can't bloody do it! That simple.
I believe, but not for any of the above reasons, which appear trivial to me. My religious beliefs give my life, and my thinking, direction.Alias wrote: ↑September 6th, 2022, 11:37 pm People want their panacea, their opium, their solace and salvation, their hope of immortality and wishes fulfilled. People miss their dead parents and want to be cured of cancer. They'll believe any damn silly thing to keep that hope going, even if they only half believe it. The more you try to talk them out of it, the harder they'll cling and more angry they'll be with you.
What turns people away from religion is prosperity, physical security and optimism.
People don't have those things now, so religion is growing.
If academic metaphysics were to change from particulars and universals to subjects and relations that would de-legitimize religion. What would need to be done is for an author such as Michael J. Loux to retract his book, "Metaphysics, A Contemporary Introduction," and then rewrite it in terms of subjects and relations. Not likely he would ever do that though but that might work.Alias wrote: ↑September 6th, 2022, 11:37 pm No, you were on about academic whatever. I meant, what practical steps, taken by real people, in the real world, where 84% of the population subscribe to a religion, would you take, or could anyone take, to de-legitimize religion?
You can't bloody do it! That simple.
No, it would not kill God.
If Michael J. Loux book stood the test of time, like a thousand or two years, he might be onto something. If he has to retract it in his own lifetime, then it becomes like a work of fiction.What would need to be done is for an author such as Michael J. Loux to retract his book, "Metaphysics, A Contemporary Introduction," and then rewrite it in terms of subjects and relations. Not likely he would ever do that though but that might work.
I did neglect that reason: Because they're lost and need somebody to direct their their lives and thoughts.I believe, but not for any of the above reasons, which appear trivial to me. My religious beliefs give my life, and my thinking, direction.
Work on whom and do what??? Philosophy students might come away with a differently shaped buzzing in their heads? Can you show me the net impact on world politics, economics, diplomacy, intelligence, science and technology, social welfare or the national rates of infant mortality and wrongful imprisonment of philosophy students?JHuber -- If academic metaphysics were to change from particulars and universals to subjects and relations that would de-legitimize religion. What would need to be done is for an author such as Michael J. Loux to retract his book, "Metaphysics, A Contemporary Introduction," and then rewrite it in terms of subjects and relations. Not likely he would ever do that though but that might work.
Pattern-chaser wrote:I believe, but not for any of the above reasons, which appear trivial to me. My religious beliefs give my life, and my thinking, direction.
How quaint that you see fit to demean my beliefs without apparent purpose.
Not briefly of course. I can say this though, subjects and relations are the highest of all words in terms of scope. It's like the top node of a system. If you change the top node of any system all of the elements in the system are affected.Alias wrote: ↑September 8th, 2022, 1:00 amWork on whom and do what??? Philosophy students might come away with a differently shaped buzzing in their heads? Can you show me the net impact on world politics, economics, diplomacy, intelligence, science and technology, social welfare or the national rates of infant mortality and wrongful imprisonment of philosophy students?JHuber -- If academic metaphysics were to change from particulars and universals to subjects and relations that would de-legitimize religion. What would need to be done is for an author such as Michael J. Loux to retract his book, "Metaphysics, A Contemporary Introduction," and then rewrite it in terms of subjects and relations. Not likely he would ever do that though but that might work.
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
by Chet Shupe
March 2023