Play dough, as for your metaphysics, it sounds like you are trying to describe one conclusion of metaphysics, and not what the study of metaphysics is. It is like someone asking you what ethics is, and you only talking about virtue ethics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Play_Dough  A) The "self" fits into the chain of cause and effect because the 'self' is involved.
Metaphysics sees and experiences 'the self' as at the center of all phenomena. It is 'a belief system'. It is based upon the 'metaphysical fact' that underneath the veils of mind and underneath the veils of the ego (all 'within') is 'the creator'. |
So, is the self the initial cause?
Quote:
B) The sense of 'physical detachment' is not really (metaphysically speaking) an actual detachment. 'Thought' is considered a 'causal agent' and if 'thought' is not involved then the 'causal agent' is a pre-existing pattern (i.e., a belief) embeded in the psyche.
Much of this is a matter of deciding where 'the self' begins and ends.
Metaphysics sees the 'self' as (ultimately) expanding infinitely... 'without' to the ends of the universe and 'within' to the pure creative source that delivered one into 'being'.
|
How is the self not detached from the objects it experiences?
Quote:
C) "Meta" means 'hidden' or 'behind' or 'not visible'.
|
Really, I thought meta meant 'above' or 'after'. As in 'After the Physics'.
Quote:
|
To test this one needs only to conduct personal experimentation. We can push a button on a TV remote and change the channels. So too can we alter reality by our thoughts. "
|
You sound a lot like Schopenhauer, who modeled Kant for his philosophy.
Quote:
|
Perhaps the 'big' metaphysical (and Socratic) question is: "What happens when God says, "I am not God"?
|
How does God fit into what you outlined as 'metaphysics'?
How is this question Socratic?
How can God say "I am not God"? That is a contradiction.