Arguably, cosmology and ontology also try to elucidate exactly the same thing.Metaphysics is the field of philosophy that seeks to elucidate most general features of reality. — Manuel
I think too many labels just lead to unclarity and confusion, when it is ultimately the same thing that we are curious about. — TheArchitectOfTheGods
Yes so they are not sciences, in the sense that they are seeking to increase knowledge, but rather speculation or mental exercises beyond that which can be scientifically observed.Metaphysics and ontology don't really have theories in this sense — Manuel
The line gets blurry here, because of course cosmology is seeking knowledge about ultimate reality. — TheArchitectOfTheGods
Yes. No. I'd bet my last .02 cents on this quasi-Aristotlean scheme:Cosmology vs. Ontology vs. Metaphysics
Are there really any meaningful differences between these terms? Or should we use them synonymously? — TheArchitectOfTheGods
Cosmology vs. Ontology vs. Metaphysics — TheArchitectOfTheGods
I think this is correct.NB: Speculative cosmology [metaphysics] gradually became physical cosmology [physics] – wholly abstract 'why this cosmos exists?' reformulated into 'how this cosmos began and evolves?' increasing grounded in observation & evidence. — 180 Proof
Yes so they are not sciences, in the sense that they are seeking to increase knowledge, but rather speculation or mental exercises beyond that which can be scientifically observed. — TheArchitectOfTheGods
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.