John, As I suggested in my prior email, my way of thinking about scientific knowledge is that it is a branch of philosophy (recall, of course, in the bygone days, science was known as “natural philosophy”). Science is a special branch of philosophy, one that warrants its own name. It is a branch of knowing based on empirical methods and data collection and testing of hypotheses (unlike standard philosophy), and a few other epistemological commitments (i.e., naturalism as opposed to supernaturalism). All I am trying to argue here is that the empirical method does not get a person “out” of the problem having to be concerned with first principles of concepts and categories. My normal term for this network of concepts and categories is one’s “justification system”; I also now borrow from Wittgenstein and call it a “language game,” and I am also now using “metaphysical system,” especially to refer to the foundational definitions. As you know, I am a big fan of science. That is why I am advocating for a Metaphysical-Empirical System of knowing. That is, science did a wonderful thing by realizing that we needed to correspond our knowledge system to analyze factual states of affairs. But there will also always be a philosophy of science because science is a kind of philosophy, a way of knowing about the world—thus it will always be dealing with first principles of knowing. Best, Gregg From: tree of knowledge system discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of JOHN TORDAY Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2018 11:20 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: metaphysics Gregg, with all sincerity and due respect, here's how metaphysics is defined in Wikipedia: the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space. Both the science 'in the box' and 'out of the box' are based on hypothesis testing scientific evidence. OK, my prediction that the origin of life is in the Singularity is not evidence based, but is based on the method I used to get back to the self-referential self-organizational basis of the unicell, working backwards from phenotypes to mechanisms developmentally and phylogenetically, which I assume gives me 'license' to speculate as to the pre-adaptation that gave rise to the first cell. Unfortunately the physics and math are not available yet to test that hypothesis, though someone I know who is a physicist/biologist suggested to me that perhaps the ambiguity I have described is the biologic manifestation of the Singularity. At any rate, unless that idea is put out there, like Einstein's theories about planets bending gravity or the Higgs particle, will never be tested. I continue to admire your desire to get us all into the tent, so let's see how far down the road we can kick this can...... On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: John, I appreciate that you want to get as far away from “metaphysics” as you can. I just want you to be clear that we mean different things by the term. To see my meaning, consider that you talk frequently about getting mainstream biologists “out of the box” of description after the fact (i.e., consequences of natural selection) and into the box of view life from its origins via first principles that allow for a mechanistic understanding more akin to the physical and chemical sciences. The Alice in Wonderland-out-of-the-box-shift that you frequently refer to is, in my language game, referencing the metaphysical system (i.e., the ideas or conceptual framework) that functions to interpret the data. The mainstream biological “box” that you are fighting against is the metaphysical system, and, as you have experienced, it is a very powerful force 😊. Best, G ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1