Catholics and the Jew Taboo by E.
References and Further Reading 1. Brief History before the 19th Century The debate begins with modern science. More generally, 17th century protagonists of the new sciences advocated a metaphysical picture: This metaphysical picture quickly led to empiricist scruples, voiced by Berkeley and Hume.
If all knowledge must be traced to the senses, how can we have reason to believe scientific theories, given that reality lies behind the appearances hidden by a veil of perception? Indeed, if all content must be traced to the senses, how can we even understand such theories?
A central problem for empiricists becomes that of drawing a line between objectionable metaphysics and legitimate science portions of which seem to be as removed from experience as metaphysics seems to be. Kant attempted to circumvent this problem and find a philosophical home for Newtonian physics.
He rejected both a veil of perception and the possibility of our representing the noumenal reality lying behind it. The possibility of making judgments depends on our having structured what is given: What is real and judgable is just what is empirically real—what fits our system of representation in the right way—and there is no need for, and no possibility of, problematic inferences to noumenal goings-on.
In pursuing this project Kant committed himself to several claims about space and time—in particular that space must be Euclidean, which he regarded as both a priori because a condition of the possibility of our experience of objects and synthetic because not derivable from analytical equivalences —which became increasingly problematic as 19th century science and mathematics advanced.
The 19th Century Debate Many features of the contemporary debates were fashioned in 19th century disputes about the nature of space and the reality of forces and atoms. These geometries raise the possibility that physical space could be non-Euclidean. Empiricists think we can determine whether physical space is Euclidean through experiments.
For example, Gauss allegedly attempted to measure the angles of a triangle between three mountaintops to test whether physical space is Euclidean. Realists think physical space has some determinate geometrical character even if we cannot discover what character it has.
Kantians think that physical space must be Euclidean because only Euclidean geometry is consistent with the form of our sensibility. This would support the hypothesis that physical space is Euclidean only under certain presuppositions about the coordination of optics with geometry: Arguing that there is no fact of the matter about the geometry of physical space.
Measurements of lines and angles typically rely on the hypothesis that light travels shortest paths. But this lacks physical meaning unless we decide whether shortest paths are Euclidean or non-Euclidean. These conventions cannot be experimentally refuted or confirmed since experiments only have physical meaning relative to them.
Which group of conventions we adopt depends on pragmatic factors: The Reality of Forces and Atoms Ever since Newton, a certain realist ideal of science was influential: By the s many physicists came to doubt the attainability of this ideal since classical mechanics lacked the tools to describe a host of terrestrial phenomena: The concepts of atom and force became questionable.
The kinetic theory of gases lent support to atomism, yet no consistent models could be found for example, spectroscopic phenomena required atoms to vibrate while specific heat phenomena required them to be rigid.
Moreover, intermolecular forces allowing for internal vibration and deformation could not be easily conceptualized as Newtonian central forces.
Many thought that physics had become a disorganized patchwork of poorly understood theories, lacking coherence, unity, empirical determinacy, and adequate foundations.
As a result, physicists became increasingly preoccupied with foundational efforts to put their house in order. The abstract concepts action, energy, generalized potential, entropy, absolute temperature needed to construct these principles could not be built from the ordinary intuitive concepts of classical mechanics.
Most physicists continued to be realists: But some physicists became antirealists. Some espoused local antirealism antirealist about some kinds of entities, as Hertz was about forces, while not espousing antirealism about physics generally. The Aim of Science: Causal Explanation or Abstract Representation?
Others espoused global antirealism. Like contemporary antirealists, they questioned the relationship among physics, common sense and metaphysics, the aims and methods of science, and the extent to which science, qua attempt to fathom the depth and extent of the universe, is bankrupt.
While their realist colleagues hoped for a unified, explanatorily complete, fundamental theory as the proper aim of science, these global antirealists argued on historical grounds that physics had evolved into its current disorganized mess because it had been driven by the unattainable metaphysical goal of causal explanation.
Instead, they proposed freeing physics from metaphysics, and they pursued phenomenological theories, like thermodynamics and energetics, which promised to provide abstract, mathematical organizations of the phenomena without inquiring into their causes.1.
Preliminary Remarks: The Rejection of Ontology (general metaphysics) and the Transcendental Analytic. Despite the fact that Kant devotes an entirely new section of the Critique to the branches of special metaphysics, his criticisms reiterate some of the claims already defended in both the Transcendental Aesthetic and the Transcendental Analytic..
Indeed, two central teachings from these. The Age of Reason of the 17th Century and the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th Century (very roughly speaking), along with the advances in science, the growth of religious tolerance and the rise of liberalism which went with them, mark the real beginnings of modern philosophy.
In large part, the. * Proponents include Aristotle St. Thomas Aquinas, Jacques Maritain and Etienne Gilson. 3. Modal Realism is the view that possible worlds are just as real as the actual world we live in, and not just abstract possibilities.
The major schools of thought in relation with metaphysics are realism, idealism, materialism, determinism, and libertarianism. Realism is an inclination toward literal truth and pragmatism.
The representation of realism in art or literature of objects, as well as actions or social conditions as they actually are. Philosophy of Religion. Philosophy of religion is the philosophical study of the meaning and nature of religion.
It includes the analyses of religious concepts, beliefs, terms, arguments, and practices of religious adherents. 1. The Word ‘Metaphysics’ and the Concept of Metaphysics. The word ‘metaphysics’ is notoriously hard to define.
Twentieth-century coinages like ‘meta-language’ and ‘metaphilosophy’ encourage the impression that metaphysics is a study that somehow “goes beyond” physics, a study devoted to matters that transcend the mundane .