On 8/13/09 9:24 AM, "Steve Peterson" <[email protected]> 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 Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
