Versions Compared

Old Version 4

changes.mady.by.user James Buttram

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Andrew Scrimgeour

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

SCANNED PDF 

What is the difference between "bad and good metaphysics"?

If "bad or unsuccessful metaphysics" is "metaphysics which fails of its highest aim," then presumably good or successful metaphysics is metaphysics that realizes its highest aim. What makes for failure and success in realizing this aim is indicated by the commonsense distinctions between "one-sided" or "unbalanced," on the one hand, and "well-balanced," on the other; or by "exaggerated" or "extreme" on the one hand, and "properly qualified" or "the golden mean," "the higher synthesis," i.e., "the unity of contraries," on the other. This presupposes, one assumes, that "[m]etaphysical affirmations seek to put into conscious conceptual form whatever is common to, or true of, all conceivable occurrences"; and that "[m]etaphysics is the attempt to characterize this [common] element [of all possibility]" – — in short, that the "highest aim" of metaphysics is to express, on "a different level of conscious explicitness" "the higher synthesis" that is "simply ordinary good sense" (WsM: 63 f., 65 f.).

...