Jackson

Science can only address the world as physicality. Since God is not asserted to be a physical entity, science would have nothing to say about it.

I've studied Heidegger. I have no idea what he means by "being."

Not that this is about postmodernism, but....Even Heisenberg said subjectivity can never be eliminated from the scientific experiment.

Sure, agree. Nothing controversial there.

Not three times.

Makes sense to me. Not sure what Angelo is objecting to.

Your position sounds similar to the ancient philosopher Cratylus, "you cannot step in the same river once."

Rude. As has been said, we are done.

I am fine with you not subscribing to it.

Your assessment is accurate.

Prove what are there?

Okay.

Not that I am aware of.

Yes.

Yes.

I never mentioned parallel worlds.

Okay. I do not agree with anything you said.

That is a pretty good explanation. People think being good means being religious.

Not sure I understood. Your belief in God is true but physicists talking about a multiverse is fantasy?

No one is talking about God on this thread. At least not me. Metaphysics need not even address the issue of God existing or not existing.

I don't see any relation between science and metaphysics. Or, science and aesthetics. Or, science and ethics.

I don't agree with your definition of metaphysics that it only refers to absolute and unchanging objects.

Most of our life has nothing to do with physicality. Like our ambitions, hopes, memories, relations to friends.

Sure.

Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/ I am not a scientist. But the entry in the SEP discu...

Okay.

No, just the opposite.

I don't know what you mean by "gaps."

Sean Carroll: "Quantum mechanics says that an electron can be in a superposition of all possible locations. There’s no such thing as the position of a...

Not a fantasy for him. Empirical.

CalTech (now Johns Hopkins) physicist Sean Carroll believes in the multiverse. It is not fake science.

I do not say mind is physical or non-physical. That is a dualism I do not subscribe to.

Ontology comes from the Greek, ontos. When Aristotle is translated as talking about being, or beings, he really just means, "things." Nothing fancy, j...

I read it. I also read Being and Time cover to cover in grad school. Quite familiar.

Why I started this thread, to have a discussion.

Briefly this is Russell's way of saying that science does not even define what physicality is: "All that physics gives us is certain equations giving ...

I did not say there is non-physical stuff. I said the very concept of the physical is incoherent.

Even Bertrand Russell admitted that the very definition of matter was incoherent.

For example, there are readers of Hegel who call it the non-metaphysical interpretation. That is, making consistent with their idea of Kantianism. The...

Almost anything. I know there is a physical world. I hardly think that explains reality.

Leibniz criticized mechanism in science and Newton's absolutes of time and space. Now, Leibniz did no experiments to prove it, yet he is confirmed by ...

I guess. Science actually means very little to me in terms of how I live and what I believe. And I have a undergraduate degree in math and read about ...

For example, physicalists insist they are not making a metaphysical claim, but they are. If everything is physical, then nothing is non-physical. Okay...

The positivists obsessed with telling us what we're not supposed to be able to think about. That legacy is still with us, though receding. To be clear...

My own understanding is that it addresses the question, What kind of thing is the world? Does the universe have a beginning? Did it come from somewher...

Agree with that. Many confuse metaphysics with theology.

I was not aware metaphysics had to be about grounding science. Not a definition I would abide by.

I asked you to name a book or article you read that is doing metaphysics in a way you do not approve. Let us look at some examples.

Many scholars say Aristotle did not name his text "Metaphysics." Or that it simply referred to what he wrote after the Physics. In the Metaphysics Ari...

I know this roils some, but Wiki is not a good source for philosophy.