According to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. ... Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended ... thus the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part. In order that thinking might not degenerate into "metaphysics", or into empty talk, it is only necessary that enough propositions of the conceptual system be firmly enough connected with sensory experiences and that the conceptual system, in view of its task of ordering and surveying sense experience, should show as much unity and parsimony as possible. Beyond that, however, the "system" is (as regards logic) a free play with symbols according to (logically) arbitrarily given rules of the game. All this applies as much (and in the same manner) to the thinking in daily life as to the more consciously and systematically constructed thinking in the sciences. By his clear critique Hume did not only advance philosophy in a decisive way but also- though through no fault of his- created a danger for philosophy in that, following his critique, a fateful "fear of metaphysics" arose which has come to be a malady of contemporary empiricist philosophising; this malady is the counterpart to that earlier philosophising in the clouds, which thought it could neglect and dispense with what was given by the senses. However, I see no "metaphysical" danger in taking the thing (the object in the sense of physics) as an independent concept into the system together with the proper spatio-temporal structure. ... .it finally turns out that one can, after all, not get along without "metaphysics"
Posted on: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:19:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015