How metaphysics probes hidden assumptions to make sense of reality

Metaphysics has something of a doubtful reputation. “I think many people think it’s a full waste of time,” said philosopher Stephen Mumford at the University of Durham, in the United Kingdom, author of Metaphysics: a very short introduction. “They think that everything is right to discuss unnecessary questions, like, conventionally, how many angels could dance on the head of a pin?”

It is not difficult to see why. Classic metaphysics – The term comes from the Greek “meta”, which means beyond – reflects on certain bizarre questions. What is a table, for example? What form of existence do colors have? In addition, it does it by reasoning alone, with tools such as “reductio ad absurdum” – a mode of argument that seeks to prove an assertion by deriving an absurdity of its denial. It is far from the empirical knowledge that scientists pursue by observation and experience.

But the idea that metaphysics is just an abstract theorization without any basis in reality is a false idea, says Mumford: “Metaphysics concerns the fundamental structure of reality beyond appearances. This is this part of reality that cannot be known empirically. ”

Indeed, as modern science has expanded its scope in territories which were once considered as the competence of metaphysics, such as the nature of consciousness or the meaning of quantum mechanics, it has become more and more clear that one cannot succeed without the other.

To see why, the first thing to understand is that everyone has metaphysical beliefs, explains Vanessa Seifert, philosopher of science at the University of Bristol, in the United Kingdom. You probably believe that objects exist when we do not look at them, for example, even if there is no strict empirical evidence that this is true.

It is also important to recognize that there is a “naturalized metaphysics”, which is distinct from classical metaphysics in that it is informed by science, explains Seifert. “You look at what science tells us about the world, and you are investigating how you can literally take it.”

This brand of metaphysics provides a vital service for science because it examines the hypotheses underlying our attempts to understand the world. “In many cases, metaphysical beliefs are the fundamental foundation on which empirical knowledge is built,” explains Mumford.

Take causation – The idea that effects have causes – that we all believe despite the fact that causal connections are not observable. “Basically, all science is based on this metaphysical notion of causal,” he says.

Nowadays, scientists have regularly struggled with all kinds of other concepts which are deeply infused by metaphysics. Chemical elements, space and time to the concept of species and the laws of nature themselves – more load more.

We have the choice, explains Mumford. We can either examine our metaphysical beliefs for their consistency or ignore them. “But in the latter case, we just assume them in a non-cop,” he says.

One of the most striking cases in which science and metaphysics collide is quantum mechanics, which describes the world of atoms and particles. It is an extremely successful scientific theory, but when it is grappling with its meaning, physicists must face metaphysical questions, such as the way in which we must interpret quantum overlays, the apparent capacity of a quantum system to exist simultaneously in several states.

Here, all we have is competing interpretations of what is really happening that does not submit to experimental tests, and it becomes clear that progress will be impossible without confronting our hidden hypotheses. To do this, some researchers have recently started to revive a tradition known as “experimental metaphysics”, in which they test the coherence of metaphysical beliefs underlying the various interpretations of quantum theory.

“In the end, you cannot do physics without metaphysics,” explains Eric Cavalcanti at Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia, one of the main supporters of this approach. “You have to manage both at the same time.”