Seoul-trekearth |
Revised for an academia.edu entry on December 26, 2022
Louis P. Pojman defines metaphysics as beyond physics. The study of ultimate reality, which is not accessible/available through empirical senses. He lists free will, causality, the nature of matter, immortality and the existence of God as being within the study of metaphysics. Pojman (1995: 598).
These are of course familiar topics on this philosophical theology and philosophy of religion website, although I do not use the term 'metaphysics' very often.
British philosopher, Simon Blackburn explains the term was used for three books from Aristotle after 'Physics' and is a term that raises enquiry about questions that cannot be answered by science and its empirical methods. Blackburn (1996: 240).
Blackburn mentions the hostility to metaphysics throughout modern times especially as David Hume mentioned having it 'committed to the flames' in 'Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding' book xii Pt 3. Hume (1748) Blackburn (1996: 240).
It is assumed by some naturalists that the scientific method would be the only way to answer any real questions that would arise within metaphysics. Blackburn (1996: 240).
Panayot Butcharov defines it generally as the philosophical investigation of nature, and its reality, in how it is constituted. The study of non-physical entities, for example God, would be addressed. Butcharov (1996: 489). Metaphysics would be rejected by positivism on the basis of being meaningless. Since it is not empirically viable. Butcharov (1996: 489). Positivism being a form of empiricism viewing empirical science as the means of gaining knowledge and metaphysics, theology, and even aspects of philosophy as being viewed as questionable in obtaining knowledge.
A key point rendered is with that of the philosopher of religion, Pojman: The study of ultimate reality, which is not accessible/available through empirical senses. I view this as correct, and since empirical science is limited on these realities then it cannot be used as the only way to answer any real questions that would arise within metaphysics.
My views are as a Reformed, Biblical, philosophical theologian and also a philosopher of religion that can attempt to look at religion and Christianity from a secular, 'outside' of the Bible perspective.
There is extant:
Documented historical revelation within the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament
Documented historical revelation with the New Testament
These make up the Bible
There is also philosophical reasoning, speculation, propositions and conclusions and therefore arguments within philosophical theology and theistic, philosophy of religion that can be made in regard to free will, determinism, first cause, everlasting existence, life and death, and other issues.
These two areas combine to make up some very serious, academic disciplines that obtain knowledge such as Old Testament Studies, New Testament Studies, Biblical Archeology/Archaeology, Biblical Languages and Linguistics, Biblical Studies, Biblical Theology, Philosophical Theology and Philosophy of Religion.
At the MPhil level quite likely, and at a PhD level most likely, one within a Religion or Philosophy Department will have interaction with modern science. For my PhD revisions after my verbal Viva I was required to consult several science journals in regard to consciousnesses and to implement this scientific research into my Doctoral thesis.
I would reason that the dismissive conclusions of positivism and other empiricists, in basic agreement, are incorrect and that there are legitimate, serious, complex academic metaphysical disciplines related to Theology and Philosophy at times. Science is still, of course, used as an academic discipline to obtain truth as well.
Louis P. Pojman defines metaphysics as beyond physics. The study of ultimate reality, which is not accessible/available through empirical senses. He lists free will, causality, the nature of matter, immortality and the existence of God as being within the study of metaphysics. Pojman (1995: 598).
These are of course familiar topics on this philosophical theology and philosophy of religion website, although I do not use the term 'metaphysics' very often.
British philosopher, Simon Blackburn explains the term was used for three books from Aristotle after 'Physics' and is a term that raises enquiry about questions that cannot be answered by science and its empirical methods. Blackburn (1996: 240).
Blackburn mentions the hostility to metaphysics throughout modern times especially as David Hume mentioned having it 'committed to the flames' in 'Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding' book xii Pt 3. Hume (1748) Blackburn (1996: 240).
It is assumed by some naturalists that the scientific method would be the only way to answer any real questions that would arise within metaphysics. Blackburn (1996: 240).
Panayot Butcharov defines it generally as the philosophical investigation of nature, and its reality, in how it is constituted. The study of non-physical entities, for example God, would be addressed. Butcharov (1996: 489). Metaphysics would be rejected by positivism on the basis of being meaningless. Since it is not empirically viable. Butcharov (1996: 489). Positivism being a form of empiricism viewing empirical science as the means of gaining knowledge and metaphysics, theology, and even aspects of philosophy as being viewed as questionable in obtaining knowledge.
A key point rendered is with that of the philosopher of religion, Pojman: The study of ultimate reality, which is not accessible/available through empirical senses. I view this as correct, and since empirical science is limited on these realities then it cannot be used as the only way to answer any real questions that would arise within metaphysics.
My views are as a Reformed, Biblical, philosophical theologian and also a philosopher of religion that can attempt to look at religion and Christianity from a secular, 'outside' of the Bible perspective.
There is extant:
Documented historical revelation within the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament
Documented historical revelation with the New Testament
These make up the Bible
There is also philosophical reasoning, speculation, propositions and conclusions and therefore arguments within philosophical theology and theistic, philosophy of religion that can be made in regard to free will, determinism, first cause, everlasting existence, life and death, and other issues.
These two areas combine to make up some very serious, academic disciplines that obtain knowledge such as Old Testament Studies, New Testament Studies, Biblical Archeology/Archaeology, Biblical Languages and Linguistics, Biblical Studies, Biblical Theology, Philosophical Theology and Philosophy of Religion.
At the MPhil level quite likely, and at a PhD level most likely, one within a Religion or Philosophy Department will have interaction with modern science. For my PhD revisions after my verbal Viva I was required to consult several science journals in regard to consciousnesses and to implement this scientific research into my Doctoral thesis.
I would reason that the dismissive conclusions of positivism and other empiricists, in basic agreement, are incorrect and that there are legitimate, serious, complex academic metaphysical disciplines related to Theology and Philosophy at times. Science is still, of course, used as an academic discipline to obtain truth as well.
But, metaphysics and scientific, empirical, research and findings, do not cancel each other out, academically.
ARISTOTLE (1936) Physics, Translated by Apostle, Hippocrates G. (with Commentaries and Glossary). Oxford: University Press.
ARISTOTLE (2018). Physics, Translated by Reeve, C. D. C. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing Company.
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
BONJOUR, LAURENCE. (1996) ‘A Priori’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
BUTCHAROV, PANAYOT (1996) ‘Metaphysics’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
BUTCHAROV, PANAYOT (1996) ‘Metaphysics’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
EDWARDS, PAUL AND ARTHUR PAP (1973) (eds), ‘A priori knowledge: Introduction’, A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.
GUYER, PAUL AND ALLEN W, in KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.
HUME, DAVID (1748) (1910)(2014) 'An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding', text derived from the Harvard Classics Volume 37, 1910, P.F. Collier & Son, web edition published by eBooks@Adelaide. Last updated Wednesday, February 26, 2014 at 13:38.
HUME, DAVID (1779)(2004) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Lawrence, Kansas.
KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan.
KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co.
KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
KENT, JOHN (1999) ‘Positivism’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.
POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
WEIRICH, PAUL. (1996) ‘Comte, Auguste’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
----
Of course if one fell over the edge for safety reasons he/she by design would fall into a catchment area of some sort where other water is stored. Even so, not a place where I would want do a martial arts workout.
Photo 1: Seoul-trekearth
Photo 2: Kuala Lumpar-trekearth
Photo 3: Marina Bay Sands Hotel, Singapore at 55 Storeys-Google Images
As I stated recently within one of my posts but also whilst in discussion with my Mother, a Salvationist who as a devout follower of Jesus sometimes has concerns over what she refers to as ‘man made’ laws. I am fine with anyone, what right have I not to be, who chooses to live their life in a Christ like manner. Whether Jesus lived or not is immaterial (I believe he did but his name was not Greek). The myth’s that surround him, much like those of Lao Tzu, spring from a truth, from a man who was by nature good. We all would do well to heed such wisdom. Jesus was evidently learned for he quotes from other wise men (‘Do unto others’) etc. What I do not understand is why anyone would want to follow an organised faith which has committed sins beyond belief, beyond any decent humanist code. Christians that follow Jesus are good. The Church they follow isn’t. If you need to chat with God then go direct but do not, whatever you do, follow the false dogmatic, ritualistic tosh as spoken by the Church. Neither am I condemning you or anyone who feels the need to participate in what is to all intents a purposes a like-minded club but surely talking to God person-to deity is far better than a having to perform in public? It serves no moral point at all. The compass is set to take you via a route of control one I would rather not go by. My moral compass is good. It has been set by listening to Jesus and Lao Tzu and Buddha and Confucius. A true Christian needs only to follow his master and his heart not the Church and not Theology.
ReplyDeleteLove,
Russell
Cheers, Russell, appreciated once again.:)
ReplyDelete‘What I do not understand is why anyone would want to follow an organised faith which has committed sins beyond belief, beyond any decent humanist code. Christians that follow Jesus are good. The Church they follow isn’t.’
All humanity is corrupt (Romans 1-6), and I have pointed out on this blog and Satire and Theology the Biblical concept that not all Christians, are in a full state of repentance in faith and if one dies will be judged accordingly, please see 1 Corinthians 3: 10-15, 2 Corinthians 5: 10, James 2, 2 Peter 3 as reasonable examples. There is some debate on the meaning of these passages but overall I think they are geared toward believers and works. Believers are the Church. When believers have a building and finances etc., it can be more complicated and there have been corrupt things happen over the centuries, no question. Also not all who have claimed to be Christians in the Church necessarily were.
‘A true Christian needs only to follow his master and his heart not the Church and not Theology.’
Following Theology is a means of making sure one’s Philosophy of God is correct and on the right track as in not a God of fiction, human-made, but a God that is reasonably presented from Scripture and can be reasoned from Philosophy as well.
Thank you again, Russell. All the best to the family.
Of course what is scientifically tractable through the laws of physics is the same, whether you are a Naturalist or a Theist. The set of physically tractable deductions, however, is so small and requires so much discipline that few have any interest in such proceedings. Thus, scientific naturalism is distinguished only by its vast library of meta-physical doctrines.
ReplyDeleteBut this completely ignores what Aristotle wrote in Metaphysics.
Cheers, Looney.:)
ReplyDeletebeautiful shots! it seems so nice xx
ReplyDeleteLetters To Juliet
I like it as it is not too cluttered. It is Bowman but customized.
ReplyDeleteCheers.
Hello. I am not undeviating if I reconcile win the previous arguments. I entertain a headache. [url=http://headachetreatment.net/#188]fioricet overnight shipping[/url]
ReplyDeleteFunny.
ReplyDeleteНикто никогда не видел, чтобы шахматисты выявляли сильнейшего, шарахая друг другу по голове досками. Если цель – определить чемпиона по шахматам, то необходимо играть по правилам. А если цель – выявить физическую подготовку и право называться чемпионом по боксу, то не нужно для этого садиться за шахматную доску. [url=http://profwoomen.ru/poznakomitsja/sluchajnye-znakomstva/]Fomichev Evgeniy
ReplyDeleteTranslatation from Google Translate:
ReplyDelete'No one has ever seen a chess discover strengths, balls to each other over the head with boards. If the goal - to determine the champion of chess, you must play by the rules. And if the goal - identify the physical training and the right to be a boxing champion, there is no need for this to sit at the chessboard.'
Another reason I have no interest at all in chess...
There is no replacement on an authentic degree.
ReplyDeleteTrue enough. And yes one in the United States may want to attend a prestigious establishment such as Harvard, Stanford, Yale, or Princeton if the degree relates, especially for a PhD or a UK/European thesis only Doctorate at somewhere like London, Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Wales. I am not that familiar with continental non-English Universities. However, without proper department and advisor support the institution is rather irrelevant as academic success, in particular in a PhD and Master's thesis context will be highly unlikely.
ReplyDeleteExcuse, that I can not participate now in discussion - it is very occupied. I will return - I will necessarily express the opinion on this question.
ReplyDeleteI do my best At the end of it all.
ReplyDeleteDo what ever makes training most pleasant for you. You happen to be a lot more very likely to workout continually should you get pleasure from it..
ReplyDelete'Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteExcuse, that I can not participate now in discussion - it is very occupied. I will return - I will necessarily express the opinion on this question.'
Confused philosopher?
'Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteI do my best At the end of it all.'
Best I Can
'Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteDo what ever makes training most pleasant for you. You happen to be a lot more very likely to workout continually should you get pleasure from it..'
Agreed.
Great article! This is the kind of info that are meant to be shared across the internet.
ReplyDeleteDisgrace on Google for no longer positioning this publish higher!
Come on over and seek advice from my site . Thank you
Co-Authors Added makes it admissible to firm up multiple bylines to posts, pages, and disposition letters types via a search-as-you-type meta box. Discrepancy 3.0, a offensive months in the making, allows you to sponsor in place of bylines without having to turning corresponding WordPress bloke accounts. Plainly engender a caller initiator avail with a view the palfrey and hand-pick the byline as you normally would.
ReplyDeleteBlogger needs to improve this new interface for the Blogger's use. As far as how to bring in more readers, followers/links and commenters, it is always a good idea to improve the visual quality of the blog. Improve graphics, improve movie quality, make it easier to post video clips and movies on blog posts. At this time it is too time consuming and I have had to bring in third-party software for editing and of course a different company, which is Microsoft for the webcam and related software.
ReplyDeleteMetaphysics is a whole world of interesting and fascinating!...Even if you cannot put it in a test tube and analyze it!
ReplyDelete-Beaker-
This site is really cool! I found here alot of information that I was looking for. I am really happy to be a part of This site!
ReplyDelete'Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteMetaphysics is a whole world of interesting and fascinating!...Even if you cannot put it in a test tube and analyze it!
-Beaker-'
True enough, it has value, although I do not use that term generally, but use terms such as theology, philosophy and related. Seems to me metaphysics is a term often used by the critics. But it is good to deal with it.
'This site is really cool!'
ReplyDeleteGood to read, thank you.
Этот пост — одно из редких исключений, когда читаешь с удовольствием и что-то для себя выносишь. Спасибо Вам. Добавлю в избранное[url=http://voronezh.recikl.ru/].[/url] :)
ReplyDelete'This post - one of the rare exceptions, when you read with pleasure and something for takeout. Thank you. Add to favorites [url = http://voronezh.recikl.ru/]. [/ Url] :)'
ReplyDeleteTranslated with Google. Yes with pizza or Asian food.
The truth is, diploma are few things but water-resistant of course.
ReplyDeleteI hope that is not code for your degree is flushable...
ReplyDeleteDoes youг sіtе hаѵе a
ReplyDeletecontact page? I'm having a tough time locating it but, I'd
lіke tο ѕhοоt уοu аn e-maіl.
I've got some suggestions for your blog you might be interested in hearing. Either way, great site and I look forward to seeing it improve over time.
Check out my web site; scholarsoftheoccult.com
rnmwales@shaw.ca
ReplyDeleteYour webpage does not work.
Cheers
aha, I like this topic, bookmark this page, huangjintang.
ReplyDelete