A metaphysician can necessarily only make metaphysical claims about the existence of God.
— praxis

Er, no. That's a metaphysical claim, and it is false. — Bartricks

Whether a god exists or not is a metaphysical question. — Bartricks

If the existence of God is a metaphysical question then how can any claim about it be anything else but a metaphysical claim? If the claim were somehow supported by science.

Yet you are confident that the empirical sciences do investigate questions such as whether a god exists. — Bartricks

I'm not aware of any such studies. I wrote that science can support or debunk metaphysical claims. Your reading comprehension could use more attention, my friend.

If the existence of God is a metaphysical question then how can any claim about it be anything else but a metaphysical claim? If the claim were somehow supported by science. — praxis

I do not understand what you are saying. "If the existence of God is a metaphysical question" - "the existence of God" is not a question. Does God exist? Is a question - a metaphysical question.

People with no expertise in metaphysics have views on it. But having views on something is not the same as being an expert on the matter.

A biologist who insists God does not exist, is no different from a baker who insists God does not exist - they're both talking outside their area of expertise and only a fool would take their claim that God does not exist to have some kind of special authority.

And similarly, a biologist who is confident that the metaphysical implications of his/her discoveries in biology are that God does not exist is, once more, someone who is talking outside their area of expertise, just as a baker who thinks his/her baking discoveries imply God does not exist would be too.

I'm not aware of any such studies. I wrote that science can support or debunk metaphysical claims. Your reading comprehension could use more attention, my friend. — praxis

Again - the implications of scientific discoveries for metaphysical matters is itself a metaphysical matter.

Do you have any expertise in metaphysics? Do you have a PhD in the area or publications in peer review journals in the area? Or are you someone who doesn't know what they're talking about, but isn't letting that stop them - an empty kettle?

If the existence of God is a metaphysical question then how can any claim about it be anything else but a metaphysical claim? If the claim were somehow supported by science.
— praxis

I do not understand what you are saying. — Bartricks

I'll try to make it simpler for you. If a metaphysician made a claim about whether or not God exists, would that not be a metaphysical claim?

You're not making your earlier claims 'simpler', rather you are asking different questions.

To make it simpler for you - you earlier made ludicrous claim that

A metaphysician can necessarily only make metaphysical claims about the existence of God. — Bartricks

That. Is. False. Do you know what 'necessarily' means?

I'll answer your question if you answer mine. :smile:

Well, I doubt that. But no, not necessarily. Whether God exists or not is a metaphysical question. But it does not follow from that that everything that one might say about God's existence is metaphysical. That point holds regardless of who is doing the saying, incidentally.

Now, a) do you have any credentials in this area at all?

Theology assumes God exists and assumes scriptures have information about that God and work from there. It certainly goes into metaphysical areas, but metaphysics as a subject area does not assume such things though a specific metaphysics expert might. And one could easily be both a theologian and an expert in metaphysics.

Whether God exists or not is a metaphysical question. But it does not follow from that that everything that one might say about God's existence is metaphysical. — Bartricks

If true, you should be able to give an example. I won’t hold my breath.

do you have any credentials in this area at all? — Bartricks

No, and worse, I probably have below average intelligence.

If true, you should be able to give an example. I won’t hold my breath. — praxis

Well, it doesn't follow from it being true that I should be able to give an example. But meh. As for an example, the claim "God's existence makes me feel lovely" is not metaphysical, yet it is about God's existence.

do you have any credentials in this area at all? — Bartricks
No, and worse, I probably have below average intelligence. — praxis

Yes, that sounds about right.

Well, it doesn't follow from it being true that I should be able to give an example. But meh. As for an example, the claim "God's existence makes me feel lovely" is not metaphysical, yet it is about God's existence. — Bartricks

Remember you're trying to support the claim that metaphysicians are the authorities on the subject. This suggests otherwise. Surely metaphysicians can say things of more substance, yes?

Remember you're trying to support the claim that metaphysicians are the authorities on the subject. This suggests otherwise. — praxis

er, no it doesn't. You're not getting this are you. You don't need to 'remind' me. Why don't you remember what you admitted in the last post.

To make it clearer for you: you no teacher. You pupil. Pupil listen, not blurt. Pupil learn, not try teach teacher.

Metaphysicians are experts on the question of whether a god, or God, exists. If you had any expertise in this area, you'd know that.

If you were above average intelligence you'd also realise that it does not follow from this that everything a metaphysician might say about God's existence is metaphysical. For instance, if a metaphysician said that "the existence of God makes me feel lovely" then they have said something about God's existence that is not metaphysical. Thus your claim that anything a metaphysician says about God's existence is metaphysical is false.

if a metaphysician said that "the existence of God makes me feel lovely" then they have said something about God's existence that is not metaphysical. — Bartricks

Are they acting in the capacity of a metaphysical authority when they say such things? No. So why don't you give a relevant example, being the expert that you are?

Are they acting in the capacity of a metaphysical authority when they say such things? — praxis

No.

So why don't you give a relevant example, being the expert that you are? — praxis

An example of what, exactly, Pratis?

I also didn't claim to be an expert. That you are not an expert does not entail that I am.

An example of what, exactly, Pratis? — Bartricks

Dementia?

A metaphysician making a claim about God's existence that's not metaphysical. Something relevant that might support the claim that metaphysicians are authoritative on the subject, if that's not too much trouble.

You have dementia? Is that what you're saying?

No relevant example, how piteous.

For it is a fact that purely metaphysical ideas—and therefore philosophical ideas—have been of the greatest importance for cosmology. From Thales to Einstein, from ancient atomism to Descartes’s speculation about matter, from the speculations of Gilbert and Newton and Leibniz and Boscovic about forces to those of Faraday and Einstein about fields of forces, metaphysical ideas have shown the way.
~ Karl Popper

You want an example of what, dementix? An example of a metaphysician making a metaphysical claim about God's existence that isn't a metaphysical claim?

Well, I can't do that as anyone who isn't as thick as a thick thing on thick day would know.

Or do you want an example of a metaphysician saying something about God's existence that isn't metaphysical?

Well I did that: a metaphysician who says "God's existence makes me feel lovely" has made a claim about God's existence that isn't metaphysical.

Look, why don't I just draw you a unicorn and you can colour it in?

Look, why don't I just draw you a unicorn and you can colour it in? — Bartricks

Can I color it both pink and invisible?

Yes, by all means.

I think you'd need super powers, more than metaphysics to truly measure God.

Metaphysics deals with what's in the universe.

God isn't really in the universe. I don't think they're authoritive on some fantasy unless they're atheist.

I am going to draw you a unicorn too.

What do you think, you can answer yes or no to the God problem through metaphysics?

Then the answer is Atheism.

'no yo'? Hmm. Look at the pretty unicorn - it's all sad. Make it happy with colour.

How hypnotic of you.

Then the answer is Atheism. — Qwex

:100: :party: We have a winner!

I suppose my basic point is that metaphysicians are essentially theorists. Theorists are not authoritative in nature but speculative. No matter how well reasoned a theory might be, it is still just a theory.

Just try and keep inside the lines and resist the temptation to eat the crayons.

For it is a fact that purely metaphysical ideas—and therefore philosophical ideas—have been of the greatest importance for cosmology. From Thales to Einstein, from ancient atomism to Descartes’s speculation about matter, from the speculations of Gilbert and Newton and Leibniz and Boscovic about forces to those of Faraday and Einstein about fields of forces, metaphysical ideas have shown the way.
~ Karl Popper — Pantagruel

I wonder how many metaphysical ideas have been off the mark. I guess that's the beauty of being a metaphysician, no one really cares when a theory is wrong.

I wonder how many metaphysical ideas have been off the mark. I guess that's the beauty of being a metaphysician, no one really cares when a theory is wrong. — praxis

Safe to say that much of what passes as definitive scientific truth today is wrong. What I love about Popper is that he is so...balanced. The most important thing to remember about science is it is only ever approximate. Otherwise you end up with Scientism.