He did a good job at defining metaphysics extemporaneously. If somebody asked me to define metaphysics on the spot like that, I would be sitting there wondering what to say for a long time.
I hate how great philosophers always start their dissertations with "I don't know if I understand anything, but here goes my amazing introduction to the very hard topic of metaphysics". Great introduction, again, but I would love less false modesty.
I think this is backwards. Ultimate refers to the end of a process. They seem to be referring to their own internal search. They start with day to day experience and work backwards to the beginning of what they perceive to be a chain of causality building up to day to day reality. This is the ultimate goal of their search, but the in terms of the thing they are examining, reality, it is the beginning, which would be called the immediate cause, or even the first cause, not the ultimate nature. The ultimate nature of reality is actually the highest level, not the lowest. I guess you could then ask if our day to day world actually is the ultimate level, or is there something above us. That sounds like an interesting question.
He did a good job at defining metaphysics extemporaneously. If somebody asked me to define metaphysics on the spot like that, I would be sitting there wondering what to say for a long time.
Love Peter van Inwagen!
humble and deep.. actually he is humble because he is deep!
EXACTLY !
I come to you to understand metaphysics.
Good intro for conversation with Peter van Inwagen :)
I hate how great philosophers always start their dissertations with "I don't know if I understand anything, but here goes my amazing introduction to the very hard topic of metaphysics". Great introduction, again, but I would love less false modesty.
P
great video
I think this is backwards. Ultimate refers to the end of a process. They seem to be referring to their own internal search. They start with day to day experience and work backwards to the beginning of what they perceive to be a chain of causality building up to day to day reality. This is the ultimate goal of their search, but the in terms of the thing they are examining, reality, it is the beginning, which would be called the immediate cause, or even the first cause, not the ultimate nature. The ultimate nature of reality is actually the highest level, not the lowest. I guess you could then ask if our day to day world actually is the ultimate level, or is there something above us. That sounds like an interesting question.
We are like fish trying to understand the ocean as their reality.
Ummmmm yeahhhh
What about the dolphin or whale that can leap out the water and look at what’s there?
Humans may be such a creature.
@@ManForToday To the dolphins and whales, the space above water is "outer space".
The fish that swims in the river is not aware of water
In "reality" there is no experiment that can prove the earth is moving.
Interviewer: This question "why is there something rather than nothing?" is the second question, isn't it?
Heideggerians: :-l
Terrible explanation.
Is that so? What, according to you, would be a good explanation?
Shave that abomination off your face please.
Metaphysics just presupposes that there is an ultimate reality by virtue of its definition.
This field is total junk
Thanks for your metaphysical suggestion that there is no ultimate reality.