In other words , that each era of scientific theory embodies a metaphysical worldview that usually remains unarticulated by the scientists themselves but is nevertheless implicit in their thinking. This view of metaphysics would reveal it not as something ‘beyond’ physics or empirical science in general but as implicit within its thinking. — Joshs
We do not see the entanglement of existence. It is a judgment about what the real looks like; a conceptualization about the whole of existence is metaphysical. Those concepts might be derived from empirical sciences, but if employed to describe what 'existence' itself is, they are put to metaphysical use. — Tobias
I am not sure to what extent people think there is one way of seeing reality. — Jack Cummins
Maybe not. But we don't see the objects of science no matter what the model is. We see things, not physical particles. — Jackson
Perhaps. But I think all people have a metaphysic whether they articulate to themselves or not. — Jackson
Perhaps. But I think all people have a metaphysic whether they articulate to themselves or not. — Jackson
On the other hand, we see baseballs and ham sandwiches. They behave consistent with classical mechanics. I think it's fair to say, at least metaphorically, they represent reality as we define it on a day to day basis. — Clarky
That's fine, as long as we recognize that use of "entanglement" in any context beyond quantum mechanics is metaphorical and not literal. Quantum mechanics does not manifest at human-scale. — Clarky
The term purports to do exactly what you intuit, postulate that what occurs on a different scale than that of humans, is what is actual. — Tobias
That is exactly my critique, the mistakes the metaphorical for the real and jump from the level of presuppositions to the ontological nature of reality. We are not in disagreement. — Tobias
This is what I find troublesome. To me, reality can only sensibly be what normal humans interact with on a day to day basis. What a few scientists and philosophers know or believe doesn't change the essence of reality. It would be absurd to say that reality is somehow inaccessible to most people. — Clarky
I think maybe we do disagree. For me, the ontological nature of reality is a presupposition. — Clarky
Welcome to the phenomenological school of thought! — Tobias
We do not interact with the ground structure of reality of a day to day basis. — Tobias
At least even us do not consider being, nothngness, essences and properties as our daily fare. — Tobias
I tend to look at this sort of questions historically and I think we are in an epoch in which our metaphysics is indeed changing. — Tobias
I am an anti-metaphysical metaphysician though. Ultimately all such truth claims are speculative and the only thing we can do is trace the historical, social and political processes of their emergence. — Tobias
the question at hand is whether or not most people think "...there is one way of seeing reality rather than the plurality of possibilities." In my experience, most people think their metaphysic is factually correct, if they think about it at all. — Clarky
Quantum mechanics does not manifest at human-scale. — Clarky
even those committed to perspectivism and the notion of there being no correct viewpoint - no totalizing metanarrative - seem to elevate this evaluative framework as somehow true, in itself a kind of totalizing metanarrative. — Tom Storm
10 Examples of Quantum Physics in Everyday Life — Pantagruel
Speaking scientifically, everything in the universe is a result of quantum behavior, but we experience reality as classical. To say that reality as people experience it is not really reality is goofy. — Clarky
So would you extend this observation to the ‘facts’ of an empirical science as well? That is, is it a problem that people believe factual correctness in science asymptotically approximates ( through Popperian falsification) an ultimately true reality? — Joshs
I think the more sophisticated version of the question is, can quantum effects manifest within our "classical" framework and I think the answer is that under certain conditions they can. — Pantagruel
Metaphysics is how we look at things, not what we see. — Clarky
The claim that "factual correctness in science asymptotically approximates ( through Popperian falsification) an ultimately true reality," is not a scientific fact, it is a metaphysical assertion. — Clarky
To say that reality as people experience it is not really reality is goofy. — Clarky
But in what way can we disentangle the metaphysical from the factual? — Joshs
A fact is what it is by virtue of its role within a value system. But the fact doesnt just reside within this system, it also alters this system. There is a reciprocal dependence between the metaphysical and the factual which allows each to change the other. — Joshs
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.