Solving metaphysics

Tell us a little about yourself.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Advocate
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am

Solving metaphysics

Post by Advocate » Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:37 am

If someone developed a world view which was internally and externally consistent, logically necessary in every respect, used common English for most purposes, could be explained at any level of detail, was perfectly compatible with the best understandings of science, and which answers the vast majority of questions in ontology, epistemology, and metaphysics, would you say that had "solved" the latter?

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 2638
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by attofishpi » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:13 pm

Advocate wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:37 am
If someone developed a world view which was internally and externally consistent, logically necessary in every respect, used common English for most purposes, could be explained at any level of detail, was perfectly compatible with the best understandings of science, and which answers the vast majority of questions in ontology, epistemology, and metaphysics, would you say that had "solved" the latter?
HELL_O

surreptitious57
Posts: 1865
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:28 pm

Advocate wrote:
If someone developed a world view which was internally and externally consistent logically necessary in every respect used common
English for most purposes could be explained at any level of detail was perfectly compatible with the best understandings of science
and which answers the vast majority of questions in ontology epistemology and metaphysics would you say that had solved the latter
All questions correctly answered then yes but anything less than that then no
For the smallest gap in knowledge would mean it could not be fully accepted

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 3941
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Harbal » Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:44 pm

Advocate wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:37 am
If someone developed a world view which was internally and externally consistent, logically necessary in every respect, used common English for most purposes, could be explained at any level of detail, was perfectly compatible with the best understandings of science, and which answers the vast majority of questions in ontology, epistemology, and metaphysics, would you say that had "solved" the latter?
So what you're asking is, if someone came up with the answer to everything would it answer everything. Well I suppose potentially it could, otherwise it wouldn't be the answer to everything. Of course, I'm assuming that everything has an answer, which it very well may not have, especially if it doesn't have a question in the first place.

uwot
Posts: 3936
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by uwot » Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:50 pm

Advocate wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:37 am
If someone developed a world view which was internally and externally consistent, logically necessary in every respect, used common English for most purposes, could be explained at any level of detail, was perfectly compatible with the best understandings of science, and which answers the vast majority of questions in ontology, epistemology, and metaphysics, would you say that had "solved" the latter?
No. They would have created a story based on the empirical evidence which, like all such stories, would be underdetermined. You can make up any story you like that is consistent with the facts. Anyway; let's hear yours.

Advocate
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Advocate » Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:24 pm

attofishpi wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:13 pm
HELL_O
W0_rld

Advocate
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Advocate » Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:28 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:28 pm
All questions correctly answered then yes but anything less than that then no
For the smallest gap in knowledge would mean it could not be fully accepted
Since part of epistemology is that full knowledge is impossible in any sense, i find your condition untenable, if not facetious.

Advocate
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Advocate » Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:29 pm

Harbal wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:44 pm
So what you're asking is, if someone came up with the answer to everything would it answer everything. Well I suppose potentially it could, otherwise it wouldn't be the answer to everything. Of course, I'm assuming that everything has an answer, which it very well may not have, especially if it doesn't have a question in the first place.
What if i phrase it "Are these conditions necessary and sufficient?"

Advocate
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Advocate » Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:32 pm

uwot wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:50 pm
No. They would have created a story based on the empirical evidence which, like all such stories, would be underdetermined. You can make up any story you like that is consistent with the facts. Anyway; let's hear yours.
All such things are essentially metaphorical, which is part of the answer (to be posted in a different threads) but my contention here is that such a set of axioms, or whatever, would be far beyond anything yet posited, that i know of..

uwot
Posts: 3936
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by uwot » Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:06 pm

Advocate wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:32 pm
All such things are essentially metaphorical, which is part of the answer (to be posted in a different threads) but my contention here is that such a set of axioms, or whatever, would be far beyond anything yet posited, that i know of..
From what I gather, you believe you have such a set of axioms. Well, the stage is yours; there's a bit of murmuring in the crowd, but this is your moment. Whaddya got?

HexHammer
Posts: 2999
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by HexHammer » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:15 pm

attofishpi wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:13 pm
HELL_O

HexHammer
Posts: 2999
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by HexHammer » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:16 pm

Advocate wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:37 am
If someone developed a world view which was internally and externally consistent, logically necessary in every respect, used common English for most purposes, could be explained at any level of detail, was perfectly compatible with the best understandings of science, and which answers the vast majority of questions in ontology, epistemology, and metaphysics, would you say that had "solved" the latter?
What you ask isn't philosophy (love of wisdom) but merely something fairytale nonsense, it's too unspecific.

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 3941
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Harbal » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:20 pm

HexHammer wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:16 pm
What you ask isn't philosophy (love of wisdom) but merely something fairytale nonsense, it's too unspecific.
I bet you can't solve metaphysics, Hex.

Advocate
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Advocate » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:51 pm

uwot wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:06 pm
From what I gather, you believe you have such a set of axioms. Well, the stage is yours; there's a bit of murmuring in the crowd, but this is your moment. Whaddya got?
No, i'm explicitly trying to elicit ideas about what it would mean before i rise to the challenge.

I'm fully aware of how may people claim to have solved this or that but are found wanting, perfectly aware that the true and correct answer will receive more scrutiny than any other, and so forth. I'm also unaware of whether you're waiting in the wings to challenge me in the positive or negative sense.

But for your edification, The nature of existence, the meaning of life, the mind/body problem, the nature of math and logic, are all simple. Everything's simple when you look at it from the correct perspective. I require no special knowledge other than semantic distinctions in specific cases. I admit nothing "supernatural". There's no mystical insight. All the normal objections cannot apply as it's part of my particular world view to rest only on what must be and what cannot be. I can explain epistemology sufficiently to lay the foundation for ontology and metaphysics, or vice versa, whatever.

Advocate
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am

Re: Solving metaphysics

Post by Advocate » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:52 pm

HexHammer wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:16 pm
What you ask isn't philosophy (love of wisdom) but merely something fairytale nonsense, it's too unspecific.
Naysaying is a worthless commodity, but is there something specific you had in mind? The universe isn't specific so i don't know why the answers to the mysteries of it would be.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest