Anti-Metaphysics Bias

Why are Aristotelian, Platonic, Neoplatonic, Aquinian etc metaphysics so unpopular among contemporary philosophers? Have they ever actually been "disproven"? What are some compelling arguments or proofs against all or each of these?

I too would like to know this. Modern philosophers all seem metaphysically illiterate.

Because the bible is a fairy tale *tips fedora*

>unpopular among contemporary philosophers?
>contemporary
They haven't been relevant since at least Descartes.

...

So exchange the word "modern" for "contemporary" and the question still stands.

Modern quantum physics and general relativity have done more to revolutionize metaphysics than any of these theologians.

>Kant
>Hegel
>Berkeley
>Spinoza
Kys

Alain Badiou, Lacan base their theories on Platonic ontological and epistemological division between truth and knowledge

Quantum mechanics is an experimental science. Experimental science takes metaphysical assumptions for granted in order to function. It can't revolutionize metaphysics anymore then you can give birth to your own parents. You clearly don't know what metaphysics is.

cursed post

if you look at this post for too long you start losing iq

>then you can give birth to your own parents
>Not being a time traveler.

Oh for sure there's lots that physics leaves unexplained. But it does prompt some very interesting questions that metaphysics has to explain which none of these theologians pondered about.

1. The connection between time and entropy.
2. The connection between time and space.
3. Bell's inequality.
4. The possibility of time travel.
5. The uncertainty principle.
6. The nature of wave functions what reality really is.
7. Multiple universes.
8. What exactly happens inside a black hole.
9. Does the universe preserve information and is rewindable or is it not?
10. The connection between mass and energy and information.

And there's just tons of metaphysical questions that were not even thought of before these scientific revolutions.

It's a combination of Descartes, Darwin, Mendel, Nietzsche, 17-20th century physics, 20th century anti-foundationalism, philosophy of language (Heidegger, Late Wittgenstein the Late, pragmatists...), 20th century philosophy of religion, philosophy of physics.

If ancient philosophers had it all figured out we wouldn't need any further philosophy. I'll have you know analytic thomists aren't dead yet, see McIntyre. Anyway this is called history of philosophy.

Also the history of astronomy from well before the 17th century had something to do with the frequency of belief in a Hyperuranium, ultimately it's both the history of science and history of philosophy.

>Experimental science takes metaphysical assumptions for granted in order to function.
Wrong. Scientific hard facts have no metaphysical assumption.

After Nietzche metaphysics started to seem useless. "Being is an empty fiction" for example. Metaphysics is largely just people obsessing over words: that's basically what Plato and Socrates did. "What is the good" etc. are just language games.

They're very crude ideas that aren't really useful for understanding anything.

The point of metaphysics is to be true, not to be useful.

1,2 Try understanding this at all without the concept of dimensions at all.
3. Absolute determinism is actually a valid solution to bell's problem, and the ancients toyed with this.
4. Everyone time travels. You are doing it even now. Zeno's paradox inadvertently proves this.
5. The Dao that can be trodden is not the enduring and unchanging Dao. The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name.
6. Waves are just oscillating magnitudes, which requires the ontological capacity to think quantitatively see 10. They knew of cyclical events due to astronomical calculations, and on a practical level they had all the data, if you graph the periodic cumulative density function of the instantaneous distances of astronomical bodies, it resembles a wave.
7. Multiple universes have been taken for granted in eastern traditions since there was any tradition to begin with.
8. Pythagoras said that everything shall be known by its opposite. If the universe were infinite, then the sky would be as bright as the sun in every direction. Infinite universe, infinite light. Yet as it is the default setting, that light would be indistinguishable, indiscernable. It is only by the presence of dark regions that the luminous stars have any meaning, else they would be as noticeable as a grain of sand on the beach.
9. Yes. No. It would not rewind, because the universe goes on its proper path, it would be impossible to deviate, as it would be to fall sideways, as even if you recreated the original conditions, the same exact thing would happen again, reliably. (Pythagoras)
10. Pythagoras stated that everyone had their number. That is to say he was the first to propose that matter could be defined purely quantitatively.

>Have they ever actually been "disproven"?
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHA

The most bullshit ideas are the ones that can't be disproven.

>No Leibniz

what was your major in college user?

>3. Absolute determinism is actually a valid solution to bell's problem, and the ancients toyed with this.
That is the most boring of solutions. It is basically abandoning casuality.
>4. Everyone time travels. You are doing it even now. Zeno's paradox inadvertently proves this.
But nobody in the past thought of time traveling backwards.
>6. Waves are just oscillating magnitudes, which requires the ontological capacity to think quantitatively see 10. They knew of cyclical events due to astronomical calculations, and on a practical level they had all the data, if you graph the periodic cumulative density function of the instantaneous distances of astronomical bodies, it resembles a wave.
They are called wavefunctions because they are like waves and not because they are exactly the same as the waves we see from day to day life.
>7. Multiple universes have been taken for granted in eastern traditions since there was any tradition to begin with.
Garbage. Concepts of heavens and hells are not at all the same as multiverses.
>9. Yes. No. It would not rewind, because the universe goes on its proper path, it would be impossible to deviate, as it would be to fall sideways, as even if you recreated the original conditions, the same exact thing would happen again, reliably. (Pythagoras)
You don't even understand the question. If black holes or some other process annihilates information than some physical processes are not reversible.
>10. Pythagoras stated that everyone had their number. That is to say he was the first to propose that matter could be defined purely quantitatively.
You don't get the question. There's something called the Bekenstein bound. The amount of information in some place directly puts a bound on the amount of mass in the place. So the amount of information in the universe implies a bound on the amount of RAM and mass (or simulator analog) that a simulation of the universe would have to take up.

"Training", Dragonballology

There is no anti-metaphysics bias, retard. Every philosopher engages in metaphysics in some way. Analytics have opened the floodgate in this regard since Sellars and Quine. Continentals are finally catching up with speculative realism.

Call me wrong, but the way I see it, Plato and the good Platonists used metaphysics as a framework for understanding psychology (microcosm), whereas modern fucks don’t even believe there is a soul to perfect, in the Platonic sense, so their ‘metaphysics’ is really just physics, or it is just completely different from the subject of the Platonists because it has a completely different goal.

>Quantum mechanics is an experimental science.

Physics ms here.

The problem is this. "Quantum" basically has 2 different meanings.

There is the scientific meaning that physicists actually use which is a statistical interpretation of a world we cannot see.

Then there is the popsci meaning which is what most people think of. The popsci version of quantum is very metaphysics. The experiments only serve the purpose of alleged "verification" of the theory. The theory comes first. For example, the claim by popsci is that the single slit experiment shows no diffraction pattern. You can google single slit experiments and see that this is false. However, the claim remains because popsci needs quantum to follow the metaphysical idea of dual realities or something being 2 things at once.

Another example: We can only "see" particles at certain points. You might know of the uncertainty principle. There's 2 different interpretations of it going on. 1 is that the nature of the universe is uncertainty/dual realities/etc. The other is that the uncertainty is a testiment to our insufficient technology.

see my reply to the other guy

>2. The connection between time and space.

This has been blown out of proportion. If you read Einstein, he made it very clear that time is an illusion that appears when space is traversed. It is in fact NOT a "fabric." It is not built into the universe, it's an illusion. Where distance exists, time exists. Popsci has taken it too far.

> 7. Multiple universes.

Do not exist.

>8. What exactly happens inside a black hole.

Matter decays into elementary particles.

Nietzche killed philosophy by turning it into a bitchfest

>or something being 2 things at once
Are you arguing that wave-particle duality is both not a thing, and a thing invented by popsci writers rather than physicists?

What they don't realize is that idea that we can simply dismiss metaphysics is an example of bad metaphysics.

A combination of Wittgenstein (metaphysics doesn't matter) and Heidegger (his take on metaphysics is so fucked up, no one even wanted to get into it anymore), followed by meme positivists

None of this is metaphysical faggot