Metaphysics

Treat it as a bit of very subtle and clever ball busting going on...and it will become clear.

L.A., I would paraphrase your statement that metaphysics asks the ontolological question "What is real?" with "What is REALLY real.?" (i.e., What is ultimately real?) This is an intellectual exercise differing fundamentally from the mystic's silence.

If humans were cooking pots, and reality was stew, metaphysics would be cooked stew.
Because we're cooking pots, cooked stew is all we ever get, so in a way everything seen from a human perspective is metaphysics.

You see, that statement demonstrates just beautifully why I have said, on another thread, that I seldom participate on any threads labeled 'philosophy' or 'theology' or 'religion' any more. It all descends to a philological dissertation on subtle semantics without a shred of actual meaning or real-life connection attached.

So, what is REALLY real is somehow different from what is FALSELY real? Your "ultimate" reality is somehow divorced from ... what?..."penultimate" reality? It is horseshit you are spouting, comparable to arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. (The answer to which is, why, all of them, of course.) I'm outta here.

I agree. "Ultimately real" is intellectual B.S., and that's why the mystics are silent. Bye.

metaphysics goes beyond science ( what is currently understood )

Not to be flippant, but maybe just looking the word up in a dictionary would be more helpful than tossing the question out to a philosophy forum -- that resource couldn't be more biased. There are several dictionaries available online to choose from and compare...

...but see tsarstepan's post on page one of this thread.

I actually don't see your point in here...
...if you are referring to all experiences being real experiences you are not saying much are you ? How does that affect the correct or incorrect chronology of efficient causes ? Or have you became an advocate of witchcraft out of laziness after getting old ? That entire talk of "angels dancing on the head of a pin" is all about quitting and go play some word games innit ?
(yes I am deliberately provoking you to see if I can get a straight reaction, so don't take it out of context)

PS - I would rather see your naive enthusiasm enduring specially with your age...that would be special...

...I really dislike the idea of people borrowing an axiom just to shove it in a dark corner of their own memory and move on...I rather move because I don't have one yet...what better foundation to an insight of truth then walking the world ?
...unfortunately we can't be near as perfect as rocks are...

Yeah, but you and tsartepan are just being smartasses, i'm just being pragmatic.

I think JL expresses the same sentiment as you do, only from a different angle. Philosophy, especially on a forum such as this, where everyone arrives at the topics we discuss by different paths, quibbling over subtle semantics takes up a lot of our time. In a professional environment, where each participant has the same background information, I think there would be less of it. But I don't know if that would cause more actual meaning or real-life connection attached, or less.

I don't think philosophy can have direct real-life connection. It can, but then we call it something else. Practical understanding, or something like that. At best, the real life connection philosophy can have is through the behavior of the philosopher, who is shaped by his experiences.

Your smug and condescending comments duly noted, Fil. But see my post above. The operative words there are "I'm outta here."

...well I tried to get something out of you but indifference with sideline sporadic comments...funny I thought you were the one being smug and condescending, perhaps I am equivocated...

Thanks, Cyracuz. Right on the button at least as far as I'm concerned. The heterodox nature of our conversational community has contributed in the past to much that is fresh and unexpected. But recently, I've suffered the feeling that my age is catching up with me. I have to read many statements two or three times to arrive at a sense of their meaning. If we all came from the same background--not to mention the same language communities--the decoding task would be much easier. But I must say that what I have understood is impressive.