I still don't know why you have received such reactions. What forums did you go to? Because, here, it would be out of place to label you as religious and irrational, unless, of course, you're talking about religion and theism.
There's no prejudice here against metaphysics. This is a philosophy forum. — L'éléphant
That's what I thought when I began to post on TPF a few years ago. Until then, I had little experience dialoging with philosophical thinkers. Most of my friends & colleagues avoided controversial topics, and most of my reading was in the physical sciences. That's why I described myself as “ingenuous” in the notes below. In recent years though, I have learned that
Materialism seems to be the Monism for many modern philosophers, and that the most fervent of those believers exemplify the derogatory category of
Scientism. Which was unknown to me before TPF.
I have tried on several occasions to clarify my non-religious usage of the term "metaphysics" for those who
criticize the idea as incompatible with their wholly Physical (corporeal, tangible) worldview. But to no avail, because ingrained belief systems are resistant to change. FYI, FWIW, this is a sample review of my reasons for using that taboo term, when referring to
the Mental/Rational/Philosophical aspects of reality, instead of Material/Sensory/Scientific phenomena :
THE MODERN MEANING OF METAPHYSICS
In my experience on TPF, posters with a Materialistic worldview are quick to object to my idiosyncratic usage of the ancient theological term "metaphysics". But I have no formal training in philosophy, so after retirement, when I began to develop my personal worldview (based on quantum & information science)
I was naive about the prejudicial baggage attached to that term, beyond its literal meaning (Nature : volume 2). Ingenuously, I began to use that word in reference to the same
sub-category of reality that Aristotle was discussing in his later books on Nature :
Human Nature*1
(how philosophical humans perceive & categorize the world).
Of course, I was aware that early Catholic theologians --- who were not primarily interested in Aristotle's first books on the mundane aspects of Nature (
phusis) --- simply distinguished the later works under the general heading of "metaphysics", meaning "after the physical stuff". By imputation though,
the term "metaphysical" came to mean "super-natural"*2. Which, for a hard Materialist, means "not-real", hence "false" and "misleading". For the practical purposes of Science, I admit to being a soft Materialist*2. Yet, for philosophical purposes, I am a moderate Mentalist (mind stuff).
For the theologians, with a religious agenda, what made Human Nature special is the incorporation of an incorporeal Soul. But,
for my philosophical thesis, “I have no need for that hypothesis”. Instead, the uniqueness of humanity is merely a
metaphysical-but-not-spiritual talent for Imagining & Reasoning, which is head & shoulders above the mental abilities of any animal. Therefore, I wrote down my personal interpretation of the philosophical implications of 20th century Quantum Physics & Information Theory under the heading of
Enformationism. The “-ism” ending was intended to posit a 21st century worldview, to supersede the outdated ancient philosophies of
Materialism (Atomism) and
Spiritualism (supernaturalism)*3. The
key insight is that Information is essentially a form of (physical but not material) Energy (negentropy), which is able to transform into Mass, which we experience as Matter. Thesis & blog provide technical references.
That emerging philosophical worldview can be interpreted as an
update of 17th century Classical Physicalism*4 with the non-mechanical aspects of Quantum Physics (Atoms now characterized as amorphous Fields of information). And to
re-interpret ancient Spiritualism in terms of modern Information Theory (both Conscious experience & Physical bodies composed of Integrated Information bits :
Holism). It's a good thing that I am not fanatical about my personal worldview. Because most Materialists & Spiritualists are not aware that their own belief systems are going out of style, as quantum Science reveals the immaterial foundations of mundane reality.
*1.
Human Nature :
From a Materialist perspective, humans are simply animals, nothing more, especially no additional Soul. But from a Metaphysical perspective, humans are the apex animals on the only planet in the cosmos known to have non-physical phenomena. Most of those immaterial aspects, such as consciousness, are shared with other living creatures. Yet, our mental prowess seems to stem from our physical uniqueness : bipedal upright posture, which allowed for big brains, and exceptional visual acuity. Together, those advantages resulted in two special talents : Reasoning and Imagination. By combining those natural gifts, humans have developed a unique ability for seeing that which is not apparent (imagination), and for discerning the invisible generalities & universalities & interconnections in the world around them (inference).
Together those faculties have produced collective behaviors not found in other animals : Materialist Science (technology) and Metaphysical Philosophy (wisdom).
*2. As a
pragmatic Materialist, when I walk on solid ground, I believe that it will support my weight, even though I have been told by quantum scientists that material substances are mostly empty space --- filled with mathematical Fields instead of massive stuff .
Practically all of the matter we see and interact with is made of atoms, which are mostly empty space. Then why is reality so... solid? https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang ... pty-space/
*3.
Supernatural :
I am not aware of anything in the world that is super-natural. However, my philosophical reasoning runs into a physical dead-end at the beginning of space-time, which defines the boundaries of empirical science. Yet
philosophy is not governed by the laws of physics, but by the rules of reason & speculation, which can literally go out of this world, in search of Multiverses & Many Worlds, and even supernatural deities.
In his empirical work, Isaac Newton laid down his own guidelines for “
experimental philosophy”*4. Yet, for his speculative philosophy, he admitted to belief in a God that is not subject to physical evidence. Ironically, “
apart from his publications on gravity and optics, Newton was also a biblical scholar, religious mystic, and alchemist”.
https://www.aip.org/initialconditions/e ... didnt-know
*4.
Newton's Naturalistic Rules of Reason :
No more causes of natural things should be admitted than are both true and sufficient to explain their phenomena.
1. Therefore, the causes assigned to natural effects of the same kind must be, so far as possible, the same.
2. Those qualities of bodies that cannot be intended and remitted and that belong to all bodies on which experiments can be made, should be taken as qualities of all bodies universally.
3. In experimental philosophy, propositions gathered from phenomena by induction should be considered either exactly or very nearly true not withstanding any contrary hypotheses, until yet other phenomena make such propositions either more exact or liable to exception.
https://blogofthecosmos.com/2016/01/27/ ... uman-race/
