[MD] What is metaphysics to you?

[craigerb at comcast.net]

[Magnus]
> To me, metaphysics has the same relationship to physics as metadata has to
> data in a database. For example, if you have an address book, the metadata is
> name, address, phone and email.

If you have an address book, the metadata is THE CATEGORIES OF 'name','address', 'phone' and 'email'.

[Magnus]
> Using  metadata, you can describe all your friends.

Using DATA that FALL INTO THE CATEGORIES OF THE metadata, you can describe all your friends.

[Magnus]
> However, IMO there's one crucial difference between the two:
> If one of your friends gets one of those nifty things called mobile phone,
> your metadata is insufficient to describe this friend. You have to add a
> "Mobile phone" to your metadata. This is ok for metadata.

> But, IMO, it's *not* ok to do that for a metaphysics. Of course we can do that 
> with our understanding/model of the metaphysics, but not to the metaphysics 
> itself.

I don't see the distinction between adding a new category to "ourunderstanding/model of the metaphysics"
& adding one to "the metaphysics itself".  (Compare, "understanding a word" with "understanding
the meaning of a word".)
Craig