10 Comments

I share your suspicion of metaphysics. Actually, I do enjoy pondering metaphysical questions, but I know to keep my speculations where they belong. For me, philosophy (and metaphysics in particular) is useful as a way of organising and understanding our knowledge. I think my view is closely aligned with yours.

It may be that it is possible, in principle, to derive knowledge about the real universe purely by thinking about it. But, it may also be that the thinking required is as complex as making the actual universe. If that's the case, then this really is an "in principle" argument, as no brain (or machine) that resides *within* the universe would be able to execute the thoughts required to derive the universe.

I've always been rather fond of Spinoza's metaphysics. It's not that I'm at all convinced by his arguments, but it seems to me that he had good insights into the nature of physics and thinking, and his metaphysics is his attempt to put a solid foundation underneath those insights. His idea of attributes as different ways of conceiving of substance makes sense to me if I think of it as a way of avoiding category errors (also thinking about different levels of abstraction). (This is my interpretation, of course; proper Spinoza scholars might disagree. I don't mind, because I am less interested in knowing what Spinoza (or any philosopher) thought, and more interested in using them as a way to have interesting thoughts of my own.)

Expand full comment

I totally agree. Btw, I don't know if you had the chance to look at the last book os Sabine Hossenfelder, Existential Physics. I don't know if it can be considered a work of "scientific metaphysics," but I think it can be a good starting point for a more empirical-based metaphysics.

Expand full comment

Prof. Pigliucci,

I tend to agree with you on this point. I would be interested to hear your take on Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals which completely eschews lived experience in favor of a moral reductionism that seems only to exist in the realm of logic. When contrasted with the Golden Mean of Aristotle, Kant's concept of virtue seems to be rather shabby, which surprised me due to the subtly of his epistemological works.

Expand full comment

I agree with your view. Do you think the real world works based on a very complex algorithm? Meaning that the web of cause-effect could be "written down" by an advanced form of AI maybe. If yes, do you think it will be possible to "look at the future" then in a very precise way?

Expand full comment