|
When I say 'metaphysics', all the ways of supporting ideas and explanations that rely upon some unseen gears turning behind reality that result in the way things actually are.
With Descartes, after his first proof of consciousness, he went on to try and prove that other things existed, but to do so he brought in God as a supporting assumption.
So by metaphysics - anything that needs to be thrown in (that may or may not exist - it is outside of the natural world) to serve as an assumption in a philosophic argument.
So, now think about the basic philosophic questions:
1) What is existence? Is there consciousness?
2) What is the meaning of life?
3) What is right/wrong?
4) What is the purpose of society and should society exist?
5) Do we have free will or is the world fate driven?
Trying to think about these questions without using metaphysics in any way is both frustrating and more interesting too. There is no quick and easy answer. Well - there is nihilism, which says that everything is meaningless and thus answers all questions. But if one rejects both nihilism and metaphysical answers you enter philosophically interesting terrain.
There is no ten commandments - so everyone could make their own moral systems. Perhaps some of these moral systems are superior. Look at the roman ideas of morality. One of the virtues was ambition (far different than current western morality, where humility is good / pride is bad). Or the greek ideas where aestetics are valued - pursuit of excellence is valued. I think Doesteosky said much interesting stuff in this area with Crime and Punishment, where the main character overthrowns the conventional moral system and believes he is the overman.
Society becomes interesting, because in some ways it allows a person to live more easily but in others it limits a person's freedom - humans have allowed themselves to enter the civil contracts of modern times. Should freedom be valued over other values?
Can good and evil exist when there is no outside forces that decide what is good and evil? There is the principle of the golden rule, but it is simply a principle. Is there a philosophic backing to what is good?
*Poof*
|