Talk:Metaphysics

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Metaphysics article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 12 months

	Metaphysics is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 1, 2025.
Article milestones Date Process Result May 23, 2024 Good article nominee Listed October 30, 2024 Peer review Reviewed January 5, 2025 Featured article candidate Promoted A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 21, 2024. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a nihilist school of metaphysics contends that tables and chairs do not exist? Current status: Featured article

This  level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy: Metaphysics Top‑importance Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Metaphysics

The content of Metametaphysics was merged into Metaphysics on 6 February 2015. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Francis Bacon

I appreciate the effort that's gone into the article and realize we have to avoid inserting everyone's personal favourites. Nevertheless, while empiricism and Hume are mentioned in the correct places as critics and as contributors (or pruners?) in the history section, the great critic of metaphysics who is often seen as the founder of that stream is not mentioned. I'd like to suggest that Bacon should probably be mentioned. I realize he is quoted less often in textbooks today, perhaps because his works are written in styles of less familiar genres, but for several critical centuries he was seen as a central figure in this story. In my mind he played a big role in switching most metaphysical thinking towards looking for "laws of nature", regularities in nature, giving up on more complex speculations, and aiming at being useful. Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andrew Lancaster and thanks for the suggestion. I found a way to mention Bacon via his influence on empiricism. I'm not sure that we should expand much on this since overviews of metaphysics often don't mention him. I'm also not sure that he was critical of metaphysics in general. As I understand it, Bacon thought that metaphysics is part of natural science. In his terminology, metaphysics is different from Aristotle's first philosophy. Phlsph7 (talk) 13:52, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I agree that it can't be much in an article like this. Whether or not we use such information, I think he indeed had an affect on what the term "metaphysics" means, or should mean, which does seem to make him important. He also had a major impact on how and why people approached metaphysical questions. Just taking the Stanford website as an easily available example of a short university style treatment for us here on the talk page: [1]

Forms are more general than the four Aristotelian causes and that is why Bacon's discussion of the forms of substances as the most general properties of matter is the last step for the human mind when investigating nature. Metaphysics is distinct from philosophia prima. The latter marks the position in the system where general categories of a general theory of science are treated as (1) universal categories of thought, (2) relevant for all disciplines. Final causes are discredited, since they lead to difficulties in science and tempt us to amalgamate theological and teleological points of doctrine. At the summit of Bacon's pyramid of knowledge are the laws of nature (the most general principles). At its base the pyramid starts with observations, moves on to invariant relations and then to more inclusive correlations until it reaches the stage of forms. The process of generalization ascends from natural history via physics towards metaphysics, whereas accidental correlations and relations are eliminated by the method of exclusion. It must be emphasized that metaphysics has a special meaning for Bacon. This concept (1) excludes the infinity of individual experience by generalization with a teleological focus and (2) opens our mind to generate more possibilities for the efficient application of general laws.

[...] He rejects Aristotle's logic, which is based on his metaphysical theory, whereby the false doctrine is implied that the experience which comes to us by means of our senses (things as they appear) automatically presents to our understanding things as they are. Simultaneously Aristotle favors the application of general and abstract conceptual distinctions, which do not conform to things as they exist. Bacon, however, introduces his new conception of philosophia prima as a meta-level for all scientific disciplines."

[...] Two kinds of axioms correspond to the following division of philosophy and the sciences: the investigation of forms or metaphysics; and the investigation of efficient cause and matter, which leads to the latent process and configuration in physics. Physics itself is split up by Bacon into Mechanics, i.e., the practical, and Magic, i.e., the metaphysical.

--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Higher-Order Metaphysics

There are only 3 branches listed so far after meta-metaphysics got merged. There currently is no mention of higher-order metaphysics or any other formal metaphysics, yet it seems that this is what a good chunk of the field is currently working on. There are hundreds of peer-reviewed papers on Google Scholar with "higher-order metaphysics" in the title, and books by publishers such as Springer on the topic. Worth adding per WP:DUE? Grammophone minds (talk) 01:01, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Grammophone minds and thanks for the suggestion. I checked a few overview sources on metaphysics (Carroll & Markosian 2010, Koons & Pickavance 2015, Loux & Crisp 2017, and Rea 2021): none of them mention higher-order metaphysics. From what I can tell, this seems to be a relatively recently conceived approach to metaphysics rather than one of the established main branches. I added a short footnote to mention it in relation to logic, but this wide overview article may not be the right place for a more in-depth discussion of this specific approach. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:10, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]