What is metaphysics? - A main branch of philosophy whose roots date back to the time of the ancient Greeks 2500 years ago

• the discipline concerned with the ultimate nature of reality

• Aristotle (384-322 BC) published a book “Metaphysics” meaning after the physics

• The word evolved form this book

• Two themes of metaphysics

  • the study of first causes : the which that does not change

  • the study of being : the fundamental categories of being

Metaphysical Philosophers - Immanuel Kant (a “bottomless abyss" and a “dark ocean without a shore”), William James (“nothing but an unusually obstinate way to think clearly”)

Introduction to Metaphysics:

• seeks to identify the structure of reality as far as possible through the rational analysis of common human experience

• operated beyond mere sensual observation and the mathematical analysis of phenomena

• studies the nature of reality

Term originated when Aristotle’s essays on problems about the categories of being were listed in early library catalogues after his works on physics philosophers began to call these writings “the books that come after the physics”

• Subsequently this was shortened to The Metaphysics

  • The topics in the essays were called metaphysics

  • Eventually the term came to be associated with subjects that transcend physics - including the supernatural and the mysterious

Topics Falling Under Metaphysics:

• Structure and development of reality viewed in its totality

• Meaning and nature of being

• Nature of mind, self, consciousness

• Existence of God

• Destiny of the Universe

• Immortality of the soul

Metaphysics from a Christian Perspective

• Must not be confused with that on which theology relies; biblical revelation and a life of faith.

• BUT the Christian evaluates metaphysical speculation in the light of the wisdom, which comes through biblical revelation, and the wisdom, which comes from a life of prayer and relationship with Jesus Christ.

What is the big deal about reality?

Let’s look at an example:

Your 5-year-old brother can’t sleep with the lights off because “something’s in my room.” You try to convince him that there’s nothing there, but he insists: “They’re real; I’ve seen them.” You ask him, “if the ‘things’ are real, where do they go when I turn on the lights?”. He replies, “Sometimes you can see them, but sometimes you can’t. They’re spirits, and they’re waiting for me in the dark.” You reassure him “just tell yourself that they aren’t real” and you turn off the lights.

Why is the child afraid of the dark?

• Maybe because for them, reality is more than the hard material objects around them

• Reality also includes an unseen spiritual realm

What do you mean when you say that spirits are not real?

You might answer:

• Reality consists only of enduring objects that you can see, hear, touch, smell, etc.

What grounds do you have for this belief?

• Many intelligent people suspect that spirits are real.... are they wrong?

  Don’t virtually all religions declare that reality is more than the material world?

  Doesn’t God (or the gods) have to constitute a kind of reality that is different from material reality?

  Not just spirits and God raise questions about what we admit to be real.

  Consider justice, goodness, liberty, truth, beauty, love...

  • Are these real?

Go back to the example above:

Consider the implications of telling your brother that the spirits “aren’t real.” Aren’t you trying to convince him that:

• They can exert no causal influence (cannot act on humans or anything else)

  • So cannot hurt, harm nor help

• Therefore they do not matter and cannot matter

  • They have no importance, no power, no actuality, no significance

  • Therefore they should be disregarded and dismissed

If these are the implications of saying something is UNreal, what are the implications of saying something IS a part of reality?

Metaphysical questions about what reality is are among the most significant questions we can ask:

• They are linked to questions about what is important for us

• What we need to pay attention to

• What has significance

• What matters

Something to think about…..

• If ghosts are not real, then ghosts don’t matter.

• If God is not real, then God does not matter.

• If the spiritual realm is not real, then it is something that can make no difference in our lives. If only the material exists, then only the material is important.

Our beliefs about reality will profoundly affect what we do with our lives and what we strive for.

Materialism or Non-Material?

St Augustine

• Reality contains within itself every possible kind of being from the lowest kind of inert matter to the highest kind of spirit. Since God filled reality with goodness, all creatures have some degree of goodness.

• Humans are in the middle of the hierarchy of reality. We have both the material bodies and so belong to the Earth, but also have spirits which therbey make us part of the spirit world as well. Humans are part of the two realms of reality

^^Eastern Materialism: ^^Charvaka philosophers of India (600 BCE

Aka the Lokyata (those who go the worldly way)

Believed we should seek out happiness in this material world and its physical pleasures.

Felt people should turn away from religion and delusions of religion. Religious worship and priests are pointless as God, souls rewards of heaven/hell do not exist.

Only one valid source of knowledge of the world: sense perception**. What we perceive with our senses is physical and material.  If we cannot know something, it cannot exist.**

Western Materialism

Democritus (460- 360 BCE) believed reality could be explained in terms of matter. (everything is made of atoms)

Therefore, the universe consists of atoms and empty space.  This includes the soul and reason.

Democritus’ ideas were eventually put aside in favour of more personal, and non-material, explanations of the universe.

• i.e. Plato, Socrates and Aristotle saw moral virtue as the road to good and happiness.

• Their influence carried the momentum of philosophical thought through the Middle Ages.

• Rise in Christianity saw an interest in moral conduct, especially with the belief of an afterlife.

In the 17th century, scientific methods turned attention back to materialism.

Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton showed the world can be quantified.

Thomas Hobbes **(1588 – 1679) :**We can know nothing of the world but measurable quantities.  Only matter is real. Our mental states (sensations, thoughts, and emotions) are part of the material brain.

Julien Of-froy de la Mettrie****: In 1778 postulated humans are nothing more than complex machines in his book Man a Machine.

Pierre Laplace****: Opposed Newton’s idea of a mechanical universe regulated by God, Universe is self-regulating

• “Divine Calculator” (a type of “super-computer” that could calculate all that had happened and all that would happen)

Four Characteristics of Materialism:

• Materialism seeks answers through objective methodology, or the scientific method. Observation, analysis and tentative conclusion. If you cannot find something through this method, it does not exist.

• Materialism is deterministic. Every event has a cause which may be physiochemical, biological, psychological sociological, anthropological etc. One may not know them, but they do exist

• Materialism denies any supernatural belief (spirit, soul, mind, or any non-material substance) reality is made of matter

• Materialism is reductionistic. It explains the universe in terms of parts and units

Objections

• Difficult to account for thinking, wishing, hoping, dreaming, loving, hating, etc.  These belong to the immaterial self, or human consciousness.

• Consciousness: awareness of things we do when both awake and sleeping.  For example, when one experiences pain, they are aware they are experiencing pain.  Awareness is consciousness.

• One can feel and see things that don’t exist (i.e. hallucinations)

• Consciousness is subjective – “first person”.  It is something that one is directly aware of from the inside, that others cannot be aware of from the outside.  It has no volume, mass, location therefore philosophers conclude this indicates there must be an immaterial entity.

• Therefore, if the material view is correct, it needs to reduce the consciousness to the material, but one cannot measure the conscious experiences.

• Matter has now been broken down.  Atoms have subatomic particles (proton, electron, and neutron) which have been broken down further into quarks, or bundles of energy.

Werner Heisenberg : “Principle of Indeterminacy” or Heisenberg Principle

Heisenberg believed subatomic particles didn’t have a determinate location and momentum until they interacted with an observer.

• Areas of probabilities over which there is a greater probability that the subatomic particle, when observed, will pop into existence.

Therefore, it begs the question, is reality dependent on the mind?

Idealism

• Reality consists of more than matter. Matter does not seem to account for everything.

• Some philosophers, called idealists, believe if you go beyond matter, you will only end up with a mental world; a non-material world of minds and ideas.

• Idealists emphasize mental and spiritual is a creative force (or active agent) of all things.

• Idealism : belief reality is composed of minds and their ideas rather than matter.

Historical Evidence of Idealism:

Plato: formalized early version of idealism.

• Physical entities around us. They are shadows of reality. Behind each entity is a perfect form which is everlasting

Saint Augustine: in City of God tells readers the present world (flesh) is temporary, but the spiritual world is real. While we are a part of the physical world, we are meant to be citizens of the spiritual world of God.

George Berkeley:

• Founder of modern Idealism.  He reacted against Hobbes’ views on materialism. Berkeley claimed the conscious mind and its ideas and perceptions are the only reality.

• He denied this world is external, independent of the mind.  Only the mind, spirit and its ideas ultimately matter.

• He claimed all things are mind dependent which can be viewed as dependent on my mind (subjective idealism) or another mind such as God (objective idealism).

• Berkeley’s Argument****:

  • We learn of the world through experiences; through senses so ultimately everything we perceive is nothing more than a bundle of perceptions (light, colour, smell, smooth, hard, trees, animals)

  • i.e. something red, juicy, hard, smooth, wet, sweet, sour is an apple.  Many sensations but one object.

  • Any knowledge we have of objects consists of knowing of the perceptions and sensations we have in our mind.  Therefore since perceptions and sensations exist in our mind, every external object must exist in the mind only.

  • Since perceptions and sensations exist in a mind, a mind must therefore exist.  Therefore reality exists of minds and its contents.

Idealism was the dominant philosophy of the 19th and 20th centuries.

Contemporary Canadian philosopher John Leslie (1940) says all things in the universe are thoughts in the mind of God.

Eastern Idealism

Indian philosopher Vasubandhu (4th century CE) had similar views to Berkeley.

• He argued we do not directly perceive things in the world around us.  We only perceive sensations in our mind when we see colours, hear sounds, smell odours, we infer from these sensations that there must be an external object that causes sensations in us.

Question: If all perceptions are in our mind, why do things happen in specific positions in space and specific points in time?  Why do events occur in the spatial and temporal world outside of us? Why do objects physically affect us?

• Vasubandhu answered the questions with the answer of dreams.  We can see things which are not real but that physically affect us.  We know a dream is not real when we awake, but regarding the real world, we need to meditate to awaken the mind from slumber.  Living an ethical life also helps us see reality.

Objections

• Commit to anthropomorphism; objects in the universe as being made up of ideas within a human-like mind.

Subjective idealism

• Recall, whatever I perceive is one of my perceptions, or a bundle of perceptions.  How to distinguish between my perception of a thing and the thing I perceive?

Objective idealism

• Materialism can account for the stability of things.  Why involve the mind of God?

Dualism: material and non-material cannot interact because displace energy in the world, which should remain constant

The Ontological Argument : an argument for the existence of God deduced from the nature of Gods being made by Anselm

• Anselm reasoned that :

  1. God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived (nothing greater can be)

  2. Something which nothing greater can be must exist in reality (because something existing in reality is better than something that exists solely in the mind)

  3. God must exist in reality

• Kant argued that this argument was flawed because it implies that existence is a characteristic of God to prove the argument/ that existence is a part of the concept.

The Cosmological Argument: the existence of an “uncaused cause” and “immovable movers” made by Thomas Aquinas based in Aristotle’s ideas

• The cosmological argument states that:

  1. Some things move

  2. What moves must be moved by another moving thing which must be moved by another moving thing…..

  3. This series of movers cannot be infinite because there must be an origin

  4. The origin cannot be moving because that would mean it must be moved

  5. This origin is God.

• This same argument format can also be made with the idea that things that exist must be caused by another thing that exists.

• Some critics say that Newton’s findings disprove Aquinas, but others disagree

• Others say that it is possible for a series of movers and causes to exist infinitely. Defenders of the cosmological argument use the Big Bang to show that the series is not infinite.

• An aspect of the cosmological argument is infinite regress: an infinite series of movers and causes with a first member but no last member/ a beginning but no end.

• Aquinas also believed that even if the universe had existed forever, the existence of this infinite chain would still need to be explained and God is the only explanation.

• Hume responds to Aquinas that if each individual motion or cause is explained by a previous one, the chain does not need any more explanation

• Critics say that if everything has a cause, mustn’t God also have a cause? Aquinas says that there is 1 uncaused cause, and that it is God.

The Design Argument: states that order and purpose in the world demand a God.

• An example of the design argument is the “Divine Watchmaker”, supported by William Paley, which states that:

  1. If we find an artifact, like a watch, that has a designed purpose, we can conclude that it was made by an intelligent being

  2. Things we find in nature, especially living things, are described with a purpose.

  3. We must conclude that they were made by an intelligent being, that is God.

• Hume objects to the design argument by stating that we have no knowledge that the world works like a watch or artifact, and we know how artifacts are made whereas we don’t know how the universe was made, so we do not know if the universe was made by an intelligent being.

• Darwin’s theory of evolution through natural selection can disprove the design argument

• Defenders of the design argument state that one can belief that evolution is the way God produces living things.

• Dembski, one of Paley’s defenders and believers of intelligent design, stated that the specificity and improbability of genes implies that they were produced by God and not by chance.

• Others argue that due to the slim chances of the current conditions of human life (the anthropic principle), it is improbable that these conditions would exist, suggesting that they were chosen by God.

• Critics of this new argument suggest that for all we know, the anthropic principle can be caused by a physical process and not God.

Theistic Alternatives to Traditional Monotheism

Difficulties in the arguments for the traditional concept of God has led people to look for other ways to think of God

• Pantheism: the belief that everything is God and God is everything, that God and the universe are interconnected. (Spinoza advocated)

• Panentheism: the belief that everything is IN God but God is much more, and is greater (coined by Krause)

Atheism: denies the claims of all varieties of theism

• Atheists claim that there is no God, many basing their belief on science and the scientific method, as well as empiricism and utilitarianism

• Utilitarianism: the happiness or unhappiness/effect of an action determines its morality

Agnosticism: the position of not knowing whether or not God exists, many believing that it is wrong to believe one way or the other

• Freud argued that people believe because they have an infantile need to be watched over by a father-like figure.

• Kant argued that our morality forces us to believe in the possibility of a just world where evil in punished and good is rewarded, and this is only possible with a God or an afterlife

Problem of Evil

• Many atheists argue that an all-good all-powerful God existed, then there would be no evil in the world, but because there is evil, this God must not exist

• Augustine argued that God only produces what is good, and because evil is only an absence of good, God does not produce it. He states that because God only produces a finite amount, there must be some evil.

• Other believers believe that evil is necessary for good, but critics say an omnipotent God could create good without evil

• Others argue that human freedom, which is inherently good, is the cause of evil

• Hick argues that evil is necessary because a paradies without pain, suffering, or evil, ethics would be meaningless and people would not be virtuous.

• The problem of evil is one possible justification for an atheist.

Traditional Religious Belief and Experience

The Will to Believe

• Writer William James suggests that it is justified to think with the heart in regards to an option that is “living, momentous, and forced”, and that you do not have to have adequate intellectual evidence and can simply be chosen by our “passional nature”

• James’ critics say that it is wrong to believe without sufficient evidence, but he replies that the claim that you need sufficient evidence is not sufficient itself.