[MD] Ironistic Metaphysics

[Joseph Maurer]

On 8/13/09 9:24 AM, "Steve Peterson" <peterson.steve at gmail.com> wrote:

I don't understand the claims that metaphysics is unavoidable. Why must
we call "not seeing a way to privilege one metaphysical system above
all other possible views" itself a metaphysical view? Why not call this
a post-metaphysical perspective?
 
Best,
Steve
 
Hi Steve and all,

When I was studying the metaphysics of Aristotle and Aquinas I was taught
that you ask two questions about everything.  What is it?  How does it
manifest? 

Metaphysics explores which question are you answering: the order of the
thing?  Or does it manifest as active, passive, or neutral in that order?
The two different questions for order and manifestation made sense to me.

Mathematics, the language of modern science, cannot describe evolution.  It
cannot divide by 0.  The neutral aspect of a manifestation, the order of
evolution, remains undetermined.  A person¹s metaphysics asks questions
about the neutral order, existence, in evolution.

Mathematics determines whether something is positive or negative.  In
mathematics the neutral 0 is indeterminate and cancels out for evolution.
Since our logic is so heavily influenced by mathematics, describing the
levels of evolution, morality, is a hard slog, and morality becomes might
makes right.

Joe

> I don't understand the claims that metaphysics is unavoidable. Why must
> we call "not seeing a way to privilege one metaphysical system above
> all other possible views" itself a metaphysical view? Why not call this
> a post-metaphysical perspective?
> 
> Best,
> Steve