I don't think it is such a hard job, because something like religion of philosophy, with spiritual exercises, was already practiced by the ancient Greek philosophers: Pierre Hadot has shown us this. Today there are several movements, like philosophy experienced as life, secular spirituality, atheist spirituality, postmodern religions, atheist Christians and so on. I think they just need to clarify their positions, to gain awareness of what the core of their tendency is. I think all of this can be fruitfully embraced by the umbrella term "spirituality", once it is cleaned from its confusion and ambiguities. — Angelo Cannata

I would bow at the alter of the phenomenological reduction!

et al,

I think your response was most insightful.

(COMMENT)

I think it would be better if Metaphysics was thought of as the study of reality. It would be difficult to mention something that might not be entangled with the fundamental of reality.

Within the generalized material universe that is detectable, that is subject to examination by the Scientific Method, there are those things that are often talked about in Theoretical Physics that rightly belong to Metaphysics. (Imagine: String Theory, Dark Matter and Energy, the Multiverse, etc) These things can be imagined but not tested. Similarly, Physics today says that Dark Matter makes up about 80% - 90% of the tangible universe. You should be swimming in Dark Matter. That is as supernatural as the belief in the Supreme Being.

( ∑Ω)

Metaphysics encompasses many things in the alternative.

Supernatural Amino
Most Respectfully,
R

Similarly, Physics today says that Dark Matter makes up about 80% - 90% of the tangible universe. You should be swimming in Dark Matter. That is as supernatural as the belief in the Supreme Being. — Rocco Rosano

No, it isn't if you don't mind me saying. Dark matter is five times as abundant as normal matter and is made up from normal matter turned black holes. Dark energy, said to be 70% of the total energy, is no matter or energy at all. It's the structure of higher dimensional space the universe expands in. So both are known.

,

Many Thanks, I learn something new every day. You are very correct. LINK: I had my labels backward.. My Old Man Syndrome is showing.

My thought is that the distance between your perception, and my perception of "Dark Energy" and Dark Matter is that area in which you capture some quantity of each dark substance (which we cannot do) and put your observation to the test under the Scientific Method. If the observation is not testable, it is not science.


What is the definition of a scientific hypothesis?

[*] The definition depends on the subject. In science, a hypothesis is part of the scientific method. It is a prediction or explanation that is tested by an experiment. Observations and experiments may disprove a scientific hypothesis, but can never entirely prove one.

Most Respectfully,
R

So both are known. — Hillary

And some Nasa fools still struggle to see what is going on with these two. Do these suckers a favor and go tell them that.

And some Nasa fools still struggle to see what is going on with these two. Make these suckers a favor and go them that. — dimosthenis9

I tried, my dear Dimosthenis! The fools are too worried for their jobs though... Isn't it clear? Small black holes whirl through the galaxies. With small radii. The closed universe expands on a higher dimensional hyperbolically underground space, the source of dark energy and inflation... The dumbos... :cool:

It is the concept of time and its paradoxes which I am most interested on metaphysics. I enjoy reading all your opinions and theories related to this topic. One of the phrases that makes me thinking about the "violation" of Ockham's razor:
Every instance of time travel generating an infinite number of alternative universes might be thought to violate Ockham's Razor, especially since the idea that an alternative universe could be generated in the first place has disturbing consequences for the metaphysics of identity.

Interesting, doesn't it?

The fools are too worried for their jobs though... Isn't it clear? — Hillary

Yeah my dear Hillary.It is crystal clear that this is the reason.
If they had announced these already, they would have to be unemployed then,since there aren't much secrets left about universe as to keep their jobs. You are right . Damn Nasa bastards.

Yeah my dear Hillary. If they had announced these already, they would have to be unemployed then,since there aren't much secrets left about universe as to keep their jobs. It is crystal clear that this is the reason.You are right . Damn Nasa bastards. — dimosthenis9

Damn Dimo! We understand each other! :lol:

I think it would be better if Metaphysics was thought of as the study of reality. It would be difficult to mention something that might not be entangled with the fundamental of reality. — Rocco Rosano

But then, this is just what I have been talking about, reality. What else?

RE: What is metaphysics?
javi2541997, et al,

I am probably the least credible source in the discussion. So I thought I would relook at some of the latest news from the latest brains on the subject.

On the issue of "Dark Matter:"

• Even after decades of searching, scientists have never seen a particle of dark matter. Evidence for the substance’s existence is close to incontrovertible, but no one yet knows what it is made of. For decades physicists have hoped dark matter would prove to be heavy—consisting of so-called weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) that could be straightforwardly detected in the lab.
  
• With no definitive sign of WIMPs emerging from years of careful searching, however, physicists have been broadening the scope of their quest.
  SOURCE: Direct Proof of Dark Matter May Lurk at Low-Energy Frontiers, Scientific American, By Daniel Garisto on June 9, 2020
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/direct-proof-of-dark-matter-may-lurk-at-low-energy-frontiers/

On the issue of "Dark Energy:"

More is unknown than is known. We know how much dark energy there is because we know how it affects the universe's expansion. Other than that, it is a complete mystery. But it is an important mystery. It turns out that roughly 68% of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 27%. The rest - everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter - adds up to less than 5% of the universe. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn't be called "normal" matter at all, since it is such a small fraction of the universe.
SOURCE: Dark Energy, Dark Matter, NASA Science . https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy

There is always some exciting news concerning "The Bulk" every time I turn around. But there is a connection to some potential problems.

First, when we consider the nonlinear nature of the mapping to a higher-dimensional space, what is the most sound and valid approach?

Second, At what point do scientific inquiries get put on the shelf given the expense involved related to the computation power required.

There may be a number of backdoor approaches that may yield more at a more reasonable and cost-effective outcome.

Most Respectfully,
R

.

.

RE: What is Metaphysics?
SUBTOPIC: Time
※→ javi2541997, et al,


It is the concept of time and its paradoxes which I am most interested on metaphysics.

(EXPLORATORY QUESTION)

• "Javi: Interesting, doesn't it?"

I am often caught in the fog of time. In fact, I get lost almost immediately when traditional physicists place a sphere (a three-dimensional object) is embedded on a space-time grid (a two-dimensional object).

(METAPHYSICS. THOUGHT EXPERIMENT)
We often see this to demonstrate how a mass wraps the space-time. However, we know that space-time is also a three-dimensional object on a vector expanding outward (we think) both space and time. And, it must be creating some sort of turbulence would be created. But, if the mass is quasi-stationary inside the 3d space-time, then the wakes in space-time will not be created. And, as space-time of the universe expands, everything else is dragged along.

Regards,
R

Dark matter: primordial black holes
Dark energy: the hyperbolic curvature of a higher dimensional space on which our universe, together with a mirrored version, inflates towards infinity.

No mysteries...

Are you an AI philosophical program or what?

Are there any reports of Aristotle sustaining a head injury? :grin:

RE: What is Metaphysics?
SUBTOPIC: Time
※→ javi2541997, Constance, et al,

I wonder what I did that caused you to ask that question?



No, I am not an AI Program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------


I believe you are correct. It is about "reality." But "reality" is a difficult subject → that most people do not want to address. It requires a very careful vocabulary.

Regards,
R

I wonder what I did that caused you to ask that question? — Rocco Rosano

The structure of the text that you have used remembers me from an AI program.
Exactly, this part: ※→ javi2541997, Constance, et al,
What does it mean?

RE: What is Metaphysics?
SUBTOPIC: Time
※→ javi2541997, Constance, et al,


(COMMENT)

"※→".= To the attention of
It is not so dissimilar to the arrow you select when making a reply in this forum.

" javi2541997, Constance," = Obviously the identification of those specifically mentioned or in response to

et al = Definition of "et al,"

Regards,
R

Ok. Thank you Rocco, I have learned something new today.

Regards,

Javi.

I believe you are correct. It is about "reality." But "reality" is a difficult subject → that most people do not want to address. It requires a very careful vocabulary. — Rocco Rosano

Or, it requires a clear reduction. It is not a furtherance of theory we are looking for, but a clearing of theory. What it is about the world that intimates "reality" is a clutter of historical metaphysics. But beneath this, one would ask, isn't there something intuitively foundational? E.g., when we speak of God, but deliver the concept from its fictions, is there not something undeniably there that necessitated the fiction in the first place? This is the "essence" of God, one could argue. The concept is only as meaningful as the meaning it possesses.
Being careful about vocabulary is right, but it also has put metaphysics IN language, the ALL of cognition, as Rosenzweig put it. But the language of the world is indeterminate.

RE: What is Metaphysics?
SUBTOPIC: Metaphysics can sometimes be stretched too far.
※→ Constance, et al,

"But beneath this, one would ask, isn't there something intuitively foundational? E.g., when we speak of God, but deliver the concept from its fictions, is there not something undeniably there that necessitated the fiction in the first place? This is the "essence" of God, one could argue."
- Constance

There is a paradox to an intelligent discussion on the topic of "The Supreme Being;" or even lesser deities. It is exceptionally difficult to discuss an entity when:

• You cannot define the entity in concept or general characteristics.
• You cannot agree on the capabilities of the entity.
• You cannot define the connection between the Supreme Being (or lesser deities) and humanity.

The Abrahamic Religious factions all acknowledge the same Supreme Being. But the practice of morals are inconsistent when - one faction makes the claim that another faction is "impure" and "the world's dogs." This is an example of a "depraved indifference" to life. And Metaphysics cannot uniformly make that leap.

Regards
R