After going through a number of metaphysical notions, now, prompted by reader's query, we finally try to answer the simple question: what is metaphysics? The very fact that one can talk about metaphysics for a long time without explicitly defining what it is gives us an important clue about this type of knowledge, more common that most people think. We sum up some of the notions we expounded upon before and attempt to give definition of "science sought for" in both traditional sense and its modern, we would claim, misconception of the "system of science". Also we touch upon the possible reasons for shunning it by modern thinkers like adherents of "analytical" philosophy and say few words on technology and its latent metaphysical origin.
In this episode of our going series "Basic Notions of Metaphysics" we inspect the classical definition of truth and its implications which reveal, as usual, the proverbial "more than meets the eye" dimension of something seemingly quite pedestrian.
So let us take a look back into our Medieval and classical past and explicate what is implicit in the notion of the truth as transcendental.
In the second part of our podcast on ailments of modern philosophy and its denouncement of supposedly illusory problems, i.e. of human propensity to think about the good, beautiful. God and other uncool subjects that should be denounced as mere affliction of mind, we turn to more mundane examples from every day life to demonstrate the superiority of dogmas over critical thinking as it is understood today.
In this podcast we put forward the notion of illusory problems and meaningless questions in philosophy. From the modern standpoint, which we exemplify by Kant's and Wittgenstein's positions, the entire history of metaphysics, theology and generally those modes of understanding that are poised to reaching transcendence in any conceivable way is merely a misunderstanding: either a natural illusion of the pure mind (Kant) or merely a case of pathological misuse of language (Wittgenstein).
When someone says that being and one are convertible, what does this mean? In this podcast we'll explicate some of the distinctive qualities of this distinct indivisibility and undivided distinction. Also, we address the error of understanding explication of oneness as reduction to mathematical or physical unit, quite alien to traditional thought, and proneness of contemporary "back to origins" thinkers to perpetuating it especially when they're explicitly trying to refute it. We demonstrate how somewhat natural temptation to find one, indivisible and comprehensive historical point from which all the ills of our times can be explained is utterly in opposition to the One that transcends determinations and is the proper origin of time and what it brings forth.
In this podcast we investigate the Medieval notion of "transcendentals", an underlying and all pervading principle of Sacra Doctrina and philosophy of Middle Ages that was nevertheless rarely in the focus of contemporary scholarship. The doctrine of transcendentals is one of those teachings that are so common and obvious that one has trouble noticing it, similarly as we have trouble noticing air that we're breathing.
Learning philosophy does not come about solely or even primarily from reading volumes of books; sometimes it comes about from resolving not so apparent layers of meaning contained in the single sentence. In this traditional "metaphysics (even) for housewives" podcast we'll demonstrate just how this comes about by taking into consideration poignant formulation of truth handed to us from 13th Century: The Truth is undividedness (or "indivision") od Being and what is.
It is time for periodical KT Q&A podcast. This time around we address reader's questions on problem of intelligence and its opposite. What does it mean to be intelligent? Can extremely intelligent men be quite stupid at the same time? What does this mean and how it discloses what intelligence really is? Is intelligence one or many things? Can intelligence be quantified and can it really be tested? Why inability to discern the good in apparent total evil is a sign of stupidity ...