Metaphysical means that a claim lies beyond our current knowledge.
So the truth value of it is unknown. So no its not wrong.
In my comment I explain that , in order to avoid all metaphysical assumptions we will have to accept Objectivity as an observer dependent term based on the regular nature of reality that our methods and senses detect , register and verify.
Do you agree with that statement? — Nickolasgaspar
'Objective' means pertaining to the object"
— Nickolasgaspar
'Objective' means pertaining to the object
— Tobias
Gracias! I didn't know that!
— Agent Smith
:lol: — Hillary
Since we are unable to have answer about first principles or the ultimate foundations of reality, I always avoid to use Metaphysical assumptions in my philosophy. — Nickolasgaspar
.The sleep of reason begets monsters. — Francisco Goya
Metaphysics as a term informs us for their currently unknown nature of those things. — Nickolasgaspar
I am not arguing for a linear approach. I only argue for an order of importance of Objective verification in the process of justifying our Descriptions. Sure a theoretical quantity is always necessary.
This is why toddlers do not have the way to communicate concepts. They lack the theory but they also lack the observations that will allow the emergence of concepts.
Those depend on each other as you said, but your argument was not about the importance of theory, but on how fundamental imagination is.
We are off topic again. — Nickolasgaspar
Like all our principles and axioms, its an educated conclusion based on all available observations from the past and present and the success we get from our predictions. None of our faith based claims enjoys such epistemic foundations. — Nickolasgaspar
Facts are not neutral. They are isolated bits of information, taken out of the context of a relationship to all kinds of states of affairs to use more analytic language. This process of abstraction is mental and already laden with value judgments. They are the result of a process to establish 'what matters'.Your angle projects this quality on the facts "'Objective' means pertaining to the object"...but again facts are neutral. The facts are what we evaluate to render the value of a claim. — Nickolasgaspar
If we understand that simple fact then we can look out which characteristics render a claim objective or not. — Nickolasgaspar
I am sure you didn't know the work I expect from induction but if you read my post...now you know — Nickolasgaspar
This is the only reason why I point out to ↪Tobias that Objective Observation and Verification/Falsification is our foundations without underplaying the value of imagination in the construction of Hypothesis. Objectivity in our Observations is how we put in check our imagination (reality check) or reasoning our assumptions, how we evaluate different competing claims and how we recognize knowledge from arbitrary opinions. — Nickolasgaspar
Wow! I didn't know we could do that, sir/ma'am! You're the very soul of clarity as far as I'm concerned.
The rest of your post, superb! Isn't it better to stop arguing about, sensu lato, noumena and just focus our scarce supply of energy on the phenomena. — Agent Smith
One fool can ask more questions in a minute than 12 wise men can answer in an hour. — Vladimir Lenin
One fool can ask more questions in a minute than 12 wise men can answer in an hour. — Vladimir Lenin
As far as I'm concerned metaphysics is just an assortment of unrelated ideas and a faithful translation of "metaphysics" should be "miscellaneous". — Agent Smith
↪Agent Smith Well it is simple because we can not include all the scenarios in a generalization. — Nickolasgaspar
I believe that we can both agree human imagination can produce amazing things, superpowers, aliens, creatures of horrors, con artists, scams, car design, Hollywood movies etc etc — Nickolasgaspar
Sure If I didn't have the ability to imagine things I wouldn't be in the business, but a more important ability is to conform your imagination to the rules of reality. — Nickolasgaspar
I knew we weren't far off but its hard work to present a position accurately and even harder to overcome the other side's preconceptions ( i include my self too). — Nickolasgaspar
All these metaphysical ideas (Philosophical Naturalism, Physicalism, idealism,supernaturalism, occasionalism, solipsism etc etc) are part of our system of beliefs for ages. We have observed zero advances in their supportive facts or our arguments.
People should allow them to be part of the History of Philosophy but they need to stop dragging them in our Philosophy. — Nickolasgaspar
1. Causality
2. Ontology
3. Identity & Change
4. Necessity & Possibility
5. Space & Time
From what I can tell, metaphysics is an attempt to get a handle on the conceptual schema that we utilize to comprehend reality.
Can you help me, preferably with an example or two, how the aforementioned 5 topics in metaphysics constitute a framework for making sense of whatever all this is? — Agent Smith
Metaphysics is not just about words and their meaning. It's about the truth value of words. It's about what the words stand for — Hillary
An uncanny resemblance to the questions one would ask in threat assessment — Agent Smith
What do you mean? — Hillary
1. What is it? (Ontology)
2. What happens to it? (Causality)
3. Does it stay the same or does it become something else? (Change & Identity)
3. Does it have to be this/that way? Could it have been different? (Necessity & Possibility)
4. Where is it? When is it? (Space & Time) — Hillary
For this reason a god or gods isnt the condition. of possibility of creativity , but rather difference produces gods. They are mere effects. — Joshs
As such, creative acts, or life itself, cannot be explained scientifically, and because of that, creativity can't be achieved by computers, nor can computers or AI ever reach the conscious status they have in naturally evolved life. — Hillary
It’s not computers that can’t produce creativity, it’s the moldy models we use to explain what the computers
are doing that are devoid of creativity. — Joshs
Computers and all we create, stem from naturally occurring processes but are themselves not naturally occurring processes, hence they are not creative. A theory of fundamental particles, the spacetime in which they live, is a thought process that corresponds, resonates with a real state of the world. Like all scientific theories and experiments associated. But these are all isolated resonances. They can only thrive in a larger process in which our whole being is involved and which can't be described scientifically itself. — Hillary
Computers are not naturally evolving processes. They are a product of these processes. Human products, that is. Naturally occurring processes can't be created. If you want to create creativity, you have to create a new universe with life evolving in it. — Hillary
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.