mlip%NADC@sri-unix.ARPA (07/18/85)
Aristotle was one of the first philosophers to attempt a rational explanation of physical phenomena in nature. His treatise on this subject was entitled "phusike", derived from the Greek word for nature. Aristotle also wrote about being and the soul. This treatise was originally untitled. Later, when Aristotles works were consolidated, his writings on the soul were placed after the "phusike" and given the innocuous title "metaphusike", literally meaning following, after, or beyond the "phusike". The title "metaphusike" was chosen simply because of the ordering of Aristotle's works. Over the years, the term metaphysics has evolved to mean the study of anything that is beyond or transcends the physical world. However, in a strict classical sense, it is the study of being and the soul (human and otherwise). mlip@nadc In Real Life: Michael Lipczynski Naval Air Developmnet Center Warminster, PA.
DAM%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA (07/21/85)
I have studied a fair amount of old fashioned metaphysics; it has little to do with physics but some of it seems relevant to artificial intelligence (my field). There is no clear-cut definition of old fasioned metaphysics. It is often equated with ontology. In modern AI and cognitive science AN ONTOLOGY is a collection of TYPES or KINDS like the types of animals or the types of computer systems, or the types of data structures used in a program (or mind), or even the types of topological spaces. An ONTOLOGICAL ASSUMPTION is an assumption that things of a certain kind really exist. For example many people assume that feelings and thoughts realy exist, but B. F. Skinner is unwilling to make this ontological (or metaphysical) assumption. >It would be nice to have a term for speculation on questions like > > 1. Does there exist a finite theory that completely describes the > fundamental behavior of matter in the universe? > > 2. Is there a simple and elegant mathematical formulation of this > theory? Why should there be? > > 3. Can we guess constraints on what this theory must be like? > (Many general relativity enthusiasts would say yes.) >Meta-physics would seem the appropriate term, but it has already been taken. I like the above suggestion for new field which studies the collection of all possible mathematical physical theories. I would call this field "mathematical metaphysics". The first step is to define the general notion of a physical theory, or perhaps the general notion of "a physics". Any definition of "a physics" should include things like Conway's game of life; the game of life seems to define a certain universe with a certain set of physical laws. We should also include Newtonian mechanics; one can certainly imagine a universe of Newtonian point masses where the only laws of physics are classical gravitaional and E&M forces. Any proposals for the general definition of "a physics"? Mathematical metaphysics could be a branch of pure mathematics (just as metamathematics is now a respectable branch of mathematics). Mathematical metaphysics would not be constrained by real physics, but it might eventually provide insights.
cooper@pbsvax.DEC (Topher Cooper HLO2-3/M08 DTN225-5819) (07/30/85)
>chapter "After Physics" = Metaphysics. The closest "modern" field is >probably Parapsychology(which likewise has nothing to do with >Psychology). It is the 'study" of the supernatural/divine world. > > ... > Sarima (Stanley Friesen) The reference of the "It" is a bit ambiguous, but the last statement is incorrect in either case. According to my American Heritage Dictionary ("Paperback edition" 1980 page 445) metaphysics is "the systematic investigation of the nature of first principles and problems of ultimate reality." It is a branch of philosophy. The adjective "metaphysical" is often used in a derogatory fashion to refer to "scientific" theories which are insufficiently verifiable, but this use is metaphorical and not really relevant to the field of metaphysics (which doesn't claim to make scientific theories). Because of the relatively recent derogatory usage, people engaged in legitimate metaphysics (e.g., such as people trying to deal with Ken Rimey's three questions, which I won't take the space to quote) shy away from the term. The closest "modern" field is certainly metaphysics. Parapsychology is the scientific study (without reviving arguments about whether or not its practitioners exemplify good or bad science) of certain supposed phenomena. Many of these phenomena are associated with the "supernatural" in the general population. So were, however, at one time, almost all observable phenomena studied by science. The name parapsychology is misleading, since it implies that it is a branch of psychology. This is not true, in my opinion. Parapsychology is an interdisciplinary field. Just now, however, it bears a particularly strong connection to psychology because of much of parapsychology's experimental techniques have been adopted from psychology, and because collaboration with psychology (e.g., in studying correlation between extroversion/introversion and psi scores) has been particularly fruitful. Topher Cooper USENET: ...{allegra,decvax,ihnp4,ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper ARPA/CSNET: cooper%pbsvax.DEC@decwrl Disclaimer: This contains my own opinions, and I am solely responsible for them.