Science vs. Metaphysics (Presuppositions vs. Accounts)
Offline Science presupposes the validity of logic.
Metaphysics accounts for logic itself.
Science presupposes that perception will give us a window into reality.
Metaphysics accounts for perception itself.
Science presupposes that objects outside of us will reveal something about themselves upon their interaction with us.
Metaphysics accounts for the relationship between people and objects.
Science presupposes that nature will be consistent, even if there are aspects of it that we do not understand.
Metaphysics accounts for the nature of consistency.
Science presupposes that any observed phenomenon will have a natural explanation (methodological naturalism).
Metaphysics examines the nature of methodological naturalism.
Science is full of presuppositions.
Metaphysics accounts for the presuppositions.
- Login to post comments
Would love to see your 'metaphysical' 'account' of 'logic'. Hahaha. The logic science uses is based on axioms. We use those axioms because they work. That's pragmatism. Pragmatism is literally unbeatable.
What a joke. Let's see your account of perception. I'll bet it's got 'god' stuck in there somewhere. God, the ultimate anti-account, the ultimate cop-out. Science uses perceptions because they work. Again, pragmatism. Again, unbeatable.
Let me guess, Genesis and Garden of Eden, right? lol How do you account for your relationship between yourself and a book full of myths? Again, science is based on pragmatism. It works.
Brilliant. Sneaking in the thing you're allegedly justifying into your justification. Again, science, pragmatism, unbeatable.
This one's just flat out wrong. Science *studies* natural phenomena, it doesn't presuppose that all phenomena are natural. It simply doesn't have the means to study the super-natural. Hint: Neither do you. Again, pragmatism, unbeatable.
Science has a starting point, true. That starting point is pragmatism. Unfortunately for your argument, pragmatism is unbeatable. If you had an idea that you could show was better, pragmatism would automatically encompass it. Unfortunately, you don't.
*cough* without actually supplying those accounts *cough cough*
Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!
Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!
It's strange for a Christian to write about metaphysics. Don't you have theology? Isn't metaphysics all devilish and satanic?
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
That's the fun of metaphysics - it can be what the user wants it to be.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Science presupposes that it's methodology is going to be pragmatic.
Metaphysics accounts for the pragmaticism itself.
Scientists always presuppose that any explanation is going to be natural. That is part of their methodology. That is why you will never find a scientist who will say, "We have not found a natural explanation, therefore the explanation must necessarily be supernatural." If they concluded that an explanation was supernatural, they would go from being scientists to metaphysicists.
Scientists wouldn't say that because the supernatural requires more explanation than any problem for which it is offered as a solution.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
We'll spend an eternity finding natural causes, because those are useful as tools of survival, recreation, etc. What use does the supernatural have?
My Website About Roller Coaster Design
When it comes to your praising of doubt and criticism, what else have been metaphysicists doing for ages? A metaphysicist must doubt everything, specially the illusory, dense nature of material world. There are even more natural worlds, compared to which this one is merely a dream. This is why buddha means 'the awakened one'. Therefore, metaphysics is more about doubt, than belief. However, until scientists will start to research nonphysical phenomena, metaphysicists will have their hands tied. Without special and expensive devices, they have to use their own consciousness as a tool to reach across dimensions, which has certain limitations. Metaphysics deals with nonphysical phenomena, this is why it has diffculties to demonstrate them physically, so the scientists would notice. In this basic stage, this is something that can hardly be noticed from the outside, physical effects are either too subtle, or too unique. The discovery should start from within. I don't say there aren't already technologies that can skip this step, but without them in hand, scientists should better start meditating.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.