RELATED QUESTIONS:
· Discuss the nature of metaphysical problems.
· Critically discuss three problems of metaphysics.
INTRODUCTION
Metaphysical problems have been and would always remain an inherent part of our existential universe. These perennial problems are quite a number and they are the defining characteristics which make human life and existence in the world what it really is. In this write-up, we would be discussing some of these metaphysical problems.
WHAT IS METAPHYSICS
In order to properly explain the true nature and vocation of metaphysics, it would make sense to initially state what metaphysics is not. For the sake of precision, metaphysics is not voodoism, occultism or magic. Also, metaphysics is not a dichotomy of idealism and materialism; or as Jim Unah puts it, a hidden double of existents. Thus, professional metaphysics is “Ontology, aka Metaphysica Generalis”.
Ontology is the study of being in itself. It is the study of what belongs to things in general and not this or that aspect of reality. Normally, whenever we try to explain reality (even if it is in a particular aspect of reality), we are practising metaphysics. It is for this reason that academic metaphysics is been stratified into “Metaphysica generalis and Metaphysica specialis”. As earlier said, Metaphysica generalis is ontology (the real metaphysics); but Metaphysica specialis refers to the regional ontologies or specialized sciences i.e. a search for “what is” in this or that aspect of reality.
The specialized sciences which deals with particular aspects of “what is” are the likes of Literature, History, Theology, Sociology, Physics, Geography, Psychology, Economics, Political Science, Astronomy, Mathematics, Chemistry and so on and so forth. In essence, any discipline which tries to explain “what is” in any aspect of reality is under the umbrella of Metaphysica Specialis. For example, Psychology is an attempt to explain “what is” as regards the human mind (an aspect of reality). Also, Geography is an attempt to explain “what is” as regards the physical structures of the earth (another aspect of reality). Again, Astronomy is an attempt to explain “what is” as regards the elementary, physical bodies and structures of the universe as a whole (another unique aspect of reality). Thus, one can see that all these particular disciplines are focussed attempts to explain the nature of being in their respective fields. Thus, they are being metaphysical; hence, the tag “Metaphysica Specialis”.
VARIOUS METAPHYSICAL PROBLEMS
The perennial problems of metaphysics seem, at least on the surface, to be among the deepest and most important questions of philosophy. Therefore, it is clear that “metaphysics is a foundation of philosophy. The basic problems of metaphysics” are discovered when one dives into deep rational and critical thinking. Although, the problems metaphysicians work on are superficially diverse, some of the basic metaphysical problems are evaluated below;
· Permanence and change
A philosopher like Parmenides is known for his theory that reality is one, fixed and permanent. He upholds the idea that change is merely an illusion of the senses. Parmenides being a monist sees reality as one big whole. Thus, even though particular things seem to change it is only an activity of the whole, which does not change in itself. On the other hand, a philosopher like Heraclitus disagrees and says that reality is in a constant state of flux. In other words, things change. He even goes on further to say that you do not step into the same river twice. He perceives things in plurality, thus change is an inherent part of nature. These varying positions are still in contrast till this present time.
· The problem of Universals
The problem of universals is an ancient problem in metaphysics about whether universals exist. Universals are general or abstract qualities, characteristics, properties, kinds and relations, such as being male/female, solid/liquid/gas or a certain colour that can be predicated of individuals or particulars or that individuals or particulars can be regarded as sharing or participating in. For example, Tunde, Patrick, and Emeka have in common the universal quality of being human or humanity.
The problem of universals is about their status; as to whether universals exist independently of the individuals (particulars) of whom they can be predicated or if they are merely convenient ways of talking about and finding similarity among particular things that are radically different. This has led philosophers to raise questions like, if they exist, do they exist in the individuals or only in people's minds or in some separate metaphysical domain? The theory which upholds that universals exist in the individuals is known as conceptualism or moderate realism. The theory which upholds that universals exist in some separate metaphysical domain is called exaggerated realism. Lastly, the theory which upholds that universals are mere names which exist only in people’s minds is referred to as nominalism.
· Determinism and freewillism
Determinism is the philosophical school of thought that postulates the idea that man is by nature fixed in his ideals, actions, thoughts, plans and endeavours ever before he even existed. Determinism has a theological undertone in that it presents God as the ultimate power who has determined all and what every man would do, be or become in life. Determinism promotes the principle that man is not solely responsible for anything he does as he lacks control of himself due to the fact that he is a determined being. Determinists hold that man is invariably affected by a lot of factors including environment, culture, orientation, background and companionship and so on. Thus, it is clear that man is determined as he is a product of his environment. Also, the determinists argue based on the principle of cause and effect. They say that every action has a cause, and to be caused is to be determined.
On the other hand, freewillism is the philosophical theory which postulates the idea that man is by nature a free being. It upholds the maxim that man must be responsible for every action, thought, and deed or endeavour that he undertakes in life. The argument put forward by freewill philosophers is that man is by nature a moral being and to be a moral being presupposes being free. Therefore, saying that man is determined is indirectly purporting that man is not a moral being. Also, freewill philosophers hold that if it is true that man were not free, why do we praise, blame, reward, and punish people for actions which they do? Thus, the very fact that we do these things implies that man is a free being.
· The mind-body problem
The problem of mind-body dualism, concerns the explanation of the relationship that exists between minds or mental processes, as well as bodily states or processes. The main aim which philosophers of mind set out to accomplish is to determine the nature of mind (mental states) and how minds are affected by the body. For example, our experiences of perception depend upon the stimuli from the external world which are received by our sense organs. These stimuli cause changes in our mental states and these make us feel a sensation which could be pleasant or unpleasant. In connection, our responses would vary according to the sensations we feel as processed by the mind (brain). Therefore, there is the perennial question of “how is it made for a conscious experience to arise out of some matter (the brain) which possesses electrochemical and immaterial properties?
Dualism and monism are the two major schools of thought that attempt to resolve the mind-body problem. Most modern philosophers of mind adopt either a reductive or non-reductive physicalist position, maintaining in their different ways that the mind is not something separate from the body. Other philosophers, however, adopt a non-physicalist position which challenges the notion that the mind is a purely physical construct. However, this problem of the mind-body dualism is far from having been resolved. Some of the various schools of thought that have set out to resolve this mind-body problem are, Epiphenomenalism, Interactionism, Occasionalism, Behaviorism, mind-brain identity theory, Functionalism and so on.
· The problem of evil
The analysis and study of the metaphysical problem of evil is known as “theodicy”. Theodicy (a term coined by Leibniz) is a theological-philosophical study which attempts to justify the monotheistic God’s intrinsic nature of having Omni-ultimate characteristics, despite the existence of evil in the world which stands to refute these God-qualities. Accordingly, the problem of evil is founded on the idea that the Almighty God is said to have infinitely great qualities like omnipresence (being everywhere), omnipotence (being all powerful), and omniscience (being all knowing) and so on. But despite these qualities which are believed to be possessed by God, it is still the case that evil is widespread in the world. The conclusion is that the presence of evil in a world believed to be created by an Almighty God with such infinitely great characteristics belittles the nature of the same God and also brings into question the validity of the characteristics He is said to possess. For example, God being omnipotent implies that He necessarily has the ultimate power to stop evil like wars, famine, murder, even natural disasters and so on. But, as we know, this is not the case. Also, God’s being as omniscience implies that He necessarily has the ability to know all things even before they occurred. If the above statement truly holds, then God should have known that his creation which includes man would later turn out to become evil, and this should have made him stop creation at all. But as we see, this is not the case and this really questions the nature of God as regarding these ultimate qualities he is said to possess. The way the philosopher David Hume puts it says it all;
If
God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able to,
Then, He is not omnipotent.
If He is able, but not willing,
Then, He is malevolent.
If He is both able and willing,
Then, where does evil come from?
If He is neither able nor willing,
Then, why call Him God?
Then, He is not omnipotent.
If He is able, but not willing,
Then, He is malevolent.
If He is both able and willing,
Then, where does evil come from?
If He is neither able nor willing,
Then, why call Him God?
CONCLUSION
The perennially challenging problems of metaphysics are due to the fact that metaphysics is traditionally concerned with what exists, how things are related and also with questions about the natures of things of various sorts. This places metaphysics in a position of being universally relevant as it cuts across all beings. Therefore, it is no surprise that metaphysics has such challenging problems. However, getting solutions to them is not the priority of the philosopher as an attempt to do so lead us to more problems.
No comments:
Post a Comment