Vendetta wrote: ↑Fri May 19, 2017 4:07 pm
Is there perhaps both metaphysical and physical realities?
That's the point of contention, really. Most people, I think, have rationally to concede the existence of some kind of physical externality or "reality." But if we stop there, then a bunch of unsavoury things like strict Determinism, amorality, selfhood-as-illusion and so on immediately follow. So not everybody's happy with that, and we go looking for a better explanation...like at the minimum, an explanation that can explain to us why we're not happy with it.
So then we arrive at the idea of "metaphysical realities." But to accept that such can exist, we're going to have to admit that physical science won't hand them to us. That galls some people. Then we're going to have to figure out how to judge our perception of such things, since physical science isn't going to help us.
How do we open the door to metaphysical realities without opening the door to superstition and confusion? That's a good question. But since it took us thousands of years (until the 17th Century) to come up with the right method for judging our physical perceptions (i.e. the scientific method), then we can hardly complain if we're finding metaphysics difficult to judge. It might take us a while to solve that one, if it can be solved.
Meanwhile, we would have either to
reject metaphysics
without sufficient reason, or continue to
entertain its existence but
without sufficient proof or a singular method for judging it definitively. Not an easy quandary, that.