Objections to Metahysics

Objections to Metaphysics
(F. H. Bradley)


To be a metaphysician, one must have the wisdom to withstand all oppositions that threatens the position one is developing as well as defending; and also the courage not to succumb to these oppositions. In the attempt to do metaphysical study, one faces series of doubts and even objections. Some of these objections are that metaphysics is an unachievable undertaking; or if achievable to some degree, is basically worthless; and that it says nothing new that the old philosophies did not already say. The task of this essay is to talk about the opinions formed against metaphysics without or little actual knowledge and to provide counterarguments in favor of study.

The first objection presented is that metaphysics is an impossible task. Man cannot know reality as it is and his knowledge cannot go beyond mere appearance. These objections are contradictory in themselves. The author argues that to talk about reality means that one knows reality as he is talking about it and to speak of going beyond implies that there is a beyond as one is able to speak about its attainability.

The second objection against metaphysics is that no definite knowledge is gained from it since it from the beginning of its history until the present generation; it talks about the same problem but has not provided (an) adequate answer(s). This might be true, that it is talking about the same problem, but it does not necessarily mean that it is dead or static. Each generation of metaphysicians provide an answer according to their times and this is what is important because this just shows that metaphysics is still developing. What is most important, I think, is that metaphysics directs our innate nature as wondering and reflecting beings. The author states that he understands that no satisfactory knowledge is possible in this field but what is important is that metaphysics helps man to think and reflect satisfactorily. If man ceases...