Testable Predictions of Metaphysics? (Split from Richard Dawkins Documentary - Enemies of Reason)

[iNow]

I looked up metaphysics in Wiki and it looks like wisdom would be a predictable and testable example of metaphysics. Yes? No?

No.

[MonDie]

Let's redefine metaphysics. In accordance with the Auguste Comte scheme, with mathematics at the bottom and sociology/anthropology at the top, what was previously called metaphysics is now cataphysics (denoting its silliness for ever thinking it was above physics). Metaphysics now denotes everything from chemistry through to anthropology.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auguste_Comte#Three_Stages

[iNow]

So the argument is, "If we redefine metaphysics so it becomes a synonym with chemistry and physics, then yes. We can make specific and falsifiable predictions with it?" If so, then I can drive my couch at 80 miles per hour down the highway if I redefine "couch" to mean "my motorcycle."

[univeral theory]

^ So, no again, then?

prove to us that you are making a question that you understand the requirements of its answer if not making jokes with it! you have been given various metapysical predictions that are testable in different academic disciplines which non of them have you tempered to disprove or falesify. but instead you keep on saying "so no again then?" this implies that it is perhaps those who give you answers or you who dont know metaphysics. or it is you or those who answer you who dont know the answering requirements of your question. this does not directly imply that you are wrong or those who answer you are wrong untill we agree on the following:

what is metaphysics? (from which you question needs an answer)

what are the requirements of answering your question?

I HOPE THIS CAN SAVE US ALOT OF OUR TIME.

[iNow]

you have been given various metapysical predictions that are testable in different academic disciplines

So, you sincerely believe that "a testable prediction of metaphysics is wisdom" is a valid reply to the request for something specific and falsifiable?

 

You honestly believe that "intuition is a prediction of metaphysics" is a valid reply to the request for something specific and falsifiable?

 

You genuinely think that "physics cannot make predictions without metaphysics" or that "because things exist, stuff happens" are valid replies?

 

Seriously?

 

If so, then I fear we are too far apart on this topic to hope to find consensus. You seem to be misunderstanding what specific and falsifiable mean, and also what a "prediction" is.

[univeral theory]

then I fear we are too far apart on this topic to hope to find consensus. You seem to be misunderstanding what specific and falsifiable mean, and also what a "prediction" is.

some where somehow, you are right. that is why i recomended some possible solution that can help me out.

1- by telling me what do you understand by metaphysics( or what is metaphysics?)

2- by telling me the requirements of answering your question which is "can any one name a single testable prediction which has ever been made using metaphysics?"

so, adress please

[iNow]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metaphysics

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/predicting

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/precise

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

[univeral theory]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metaphysics

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/predicting

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/precise

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

 

well.

so then; why do you "still" think that the predictions of such metaphysical theories like; Platonism, Aristotelianism, Thomism, Cartesianism (see also dualism), idealism, realism, and materialism are un testatable?

and why do you say that; the "so called" metaphysical predictions like; the mind make sense(recognises) the feasible existence as the res-cogitan, energy processes this sensing (recognition) as the res-extensa, and the speed of consciousness regulates and coordinates how,when,what,where to make this recognition- are not metaphysical, if metaphysical then are not predictions, if predictions they are not precise, if precise are not testable?

[iNow]

why do you "still" think that the predictions of such metaphysical theories like; Platonism, Aristotelianism, Thomism, Cartesianism (see also dualism), idealism, realism, and materialism are un testatable?

 

Please be more specific. To which specific predictions made by those "theories" are you referring? If you can say something less broad than "metaphysics leads to intuition," then perhaps we can try to falsify it. Until then, you're basically waving your hands and evading the central request.

 

and why do you say that; the "so called" metaphysical predictions like; the mind make sense(recognises) the feasible existence as the res-cogitan, energy processes this sensing (recognition) as the res-extensa, and the speed of consciousness regulates and coordinates how,when,what,where to make this recognition- are not metaphysical, if metaphysical then are not predictions, if predictions they are not precise, if precise are not testable?

 

Do you have no understanding of what the term "precise" means? The above is basically useless word salad, if I'm honest.

Edited July 4, 2013 by iNow

[univeral theory]

 

Please be more specific. To which specific predictions made by those "theories" are you referring? If you can say something less broad than "metaphysics leads to intuition," then perhaps we can try to falsify it. Until then, you're basically waving your hands and evading the central request.

 

Do you have no understanding of what the term "precise" means? The above is basically useless word salad, if I'm honest.

 

from here:http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/precise, precise means "exactly or sharply defined" which requires testability and falsefiability of a defined phenomena.

this does not only mean that metaphysics leads to intution, but it means that metaphysics lead to correct definitions and catigories of different phenomena or things based on testable predictions that can be falsified through res- cogitan (which is the mind in which the process of intution take part), res- extensa , and the regulation and cordinating thing(which is the speed of consciousness).

 

for more specificity about the predictions of metaphysical theories like;dualism - which defines existence as the correctly logical sequence of contradicting or opposite events or phenomena is testable and falsefiable.

so then ask how.

[Moontanman]

from here:http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/precise, precise means "exactly or sharply defined" which requires testability and falsefiability of a defined phenomena.

this does not only mean that metaphysics leads to intution, but it means that metaphysics lead to correct definitions and catigories of different phenomena or things based on testable predictions that can be falsified through res- cogitan (which is the mind in which the process of intution take part), res- extensa , and the regulation and cordinating thing(which is the speed of consciousness).

 

for more specificity about the predictions of metaphysical theories like;dualism - which defines existence as the correctly logical sequence of contradicting or opposite events or phenomena is testable and falsefiable.

so then ask how.

 

I would think that if you had something you would tell us up front instead of this tap dance around the issue like you are doing here...

[iNow]

from here: precise means "exactly or sharply defined" which requires testability and falsefiability of a defined phenomena.

this does not only mean that metaphysics leads to intution, but it means that metaphysics lead to correct definitions and catigories of different phenomena or things based on testable predictions that can be falsified

I notice you continue to evade the core question posed to you. That is rather telling.

 

You mentioned, " the predictions of such metaphysical theories like; Platonism, Aristotelianism, Thomism, Cartesianism (see also dualism), idealism, realism, and materialism."

 

I asked you to please be more specific, and narrowed the request for you to share to which specific predictions made by those "theories" are you referring.

 

Since you've yet again evaded that request, I will repeat... If you can say something less broad than "metaphysics leads to intuition," or if you can offer a real prediction that is not just word salad and baseless assertions, then perhaps we can try to falsify it. Until then, you're basically waving your hands and wasting everyone's time.

Edited July 6, 2013 by iNow

[Villain]

This need for testable metaphysical predictions is, in itself, a fault with your metaphysical position.

[Moontanman]

This need for testable metaphysical predictions is, in itself, a fault with your metaphysical position.

 

 

If no testable predictions are possible what use is metaphysics beyond blind speculation?

[Villain]

 

 

If no testable predictions are possible what use is metaphysics beyond blind speculation?

 

Well, what is your starting point to get to testable predictions in the first place, if not from concious awareness?

[iNow]

Well, what is your starting point to get to testable predictions in the first place, if not from concious awareness?

Don't we have that as a default? It's like asking if gravity didn't exist how we'd all avoid floating off the planet. I also wonder why it appears you are conflating metaphysics with conscious awareness.

[Villain]

Don't we have that as a default? It's like asking if gravity didn't exist how we'd all avoid floating off the planet. I also wonder why it appears you are conflating metaphysics with conscious awareness.

 

Not if we want to consciously question our otherwise accepted and unreasoned assumptions, by concious awareness I mean the position that we find ourselves at our most basic. Not a concious mind that is the sum of the brain or any other cause, purely our self as presented as is. From such a being we form ideas and notions of reality by reason and choice.

[Moontanman]

You seem to be saying that conscious awareness is metaphysical, I see no reason to assume that...

[John Cuthber]

 

 

If no testable predictions are possible what use is metaphysics beyond blind speculation?

Well, if you are playing scrabble metaphysics is worth 23 points.

[Villain]

You seem to be saying that conscious awareness is metaphysical, I see no reason to assume that...

By concious awareness I mean that which would exist if you woke up from a coma without any previous knowledge of experience but capable of thought.

[krash661]

Well, if you are playing scrabble metaphysics is worth 23 points.

lol

this made me smile.

lol

By concious awareness I mean that which would exist if you woke up from a coma without any previous knowledge of experience but capable of thought.

this is called amnesia

[Moontanman]

By concious awareness I mean that which would exist if you woke up from a coma without any previous knowledge of experience but capable of thought.

 

Nonetheless why would you say it's metaphysical?

[Villain]

 

Nonetheless why would you say it's metaphysical?

 

It's not in itself metaphysical, it's merely the starting position from which we create a metaphysical position if we break things down to their most basic. From such a position we ask what is reality or real on the assumption/intuition that we ourselves (mind) are real. From there we find numerous problems that are not testable but that is not metaphysics' fault, but the nature of reality and being (humaness). Even though it doesn't lead to definite answers it can still impact and does impact our understanding of other areas.

[John Cuthber]

"By concious awareness I mean that which would exist if you woke up from a coma without any previous knowledge of experience but capable of thought."

That looks to me like the state in which we are all born. Can we ask a newborn baby to come up with an answer to the OP's question?

[Villain]

"By concious awareness I mean that which would exist if you woke up from a coma without any previous knowledge of experience but capable of thought."

That looks to me like the state in which we are all born. Can we ask a newborn baby to come up with an answer to the OP's question?

A new born baby is unlikely to be capable of mathematics, logic or reason.