You have so many empty words. — whollyrolling
Please share your brilliant thoughts on how genetics have no place in determining who we become. — whollyrolling
We are not born a blank slate though, obviously. We have billions of years of genetic coding inside us. — whollyrolling
If you believe that I deem science as the be all and end all, then you clearly misunderstood my statement that with science "some understanding" might be possible. — whollyrolling
See if you can attempt intellect without falling blindly into sarcasm and insinuation. — whollyrolling
To finalize this point I want to point out that it is incomprehensible to think of a human that has no interpretive overhead attached to facts. — CaZaNOx
You can experience genetics by observing their behaviour, and then you can have your findings peer reviewed by a number of critical experts who attempt to vilify your results in some way. — whollyrolling
So what you're saying, in summary, is that you're a troll. — whollyrolling
Metaphysics tries to understand the physical by applying the idiotic to it. The final outcome of empiricism is some possible understanding of things, while metaphysics is as futile as anarchism. — whollyrolling
No, I'm saying that they can't be answered - well, they can't be answered unequivocally. They're in some sense beyond adjudication, you can't appeal an ultimate authority to judge the different responses. — Wayfarer
The very idea of metaphysics is that, as a domain of enquiry, it is not within the domain of physical, i.e. emprical, enquiry. — Janus
Kant pointed out we have an unavoidable tendency to wonder and speculate about the "ultimate" nature of things. We cannot achieve any such knowledge via empirical inquiry or pure reason. Diverse metaphysical ideas might entail different ethical stances, so metaphysics may of practical significance. — Janus
Maybe we should have made this thread: "Do we need metaphysics? (Be sure to tell us just what you believe metaphysics to be when you give your answer)" — Terrapin Station
I think it is extremely important to understand 'what is behind physics' and there indeed is a need for metaphysics.A long-standing assumption in philosophy is that there is a need for metaphysics. But is it true? Why do we need to sort out whether the universe is material, non-material, both, or neither?
What do you think? Terrapin Station — frank
As the term itself is defined, you simply cannot get answers to metaphysical questions in the same way as you can for ordinary physics, science, etc. — ssu
So posing that there are agents is a metaphysical activity? Why so? — frank
Objectivity I say. That you can test them if the assumption is correct or false.As the term is conventionally defined in philosophy, why aren't physics claims metaphysical claims? — Terrapin Station
The theory of the intelligible as an integral component of what exists is an expression of that thought. — Valentinus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.