Practical Philosophy vs. Metaphysics

Lately, I have been wondering about the differences and similarities between practical philosophy and metaphysics.  There is a lot of overlap between the two subjects.

Practical philosophy uses philosophical ideas and incorporates them into everyday life.  It focuses on life skills (decision making, interpersonal relationships, and ethics for example) and tends to be reflective in nature.

Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy that is also practical and reflective in nature.  It covers a lot of the same topics as practical philosophy.  Metaphysics also covers topics dealing with unexplained phenomena.

I think the main difference is metaphysics deals more with spirituality and religion when trying to answer questions about the origin and meaning of life

That’s my thoughts on the subject, but I would love to know what you think about it.


2 thoughts on “Practical Philosophy vs. Metaphysics

  1. desertcurmudgeon says:

    Great topic. Metaphysics certainly used to be a field of study that had direct links to theology, or at the very least, explored unproven subjects with the understanding that no proof can be offered in the form of sense perceptions or even mathematical formulas. But modern physics (especially quantum physics) is beginning to shatter the mechanical cause-effect laws of Newtonian physics and has forced even the most atheistic of scientists to acknowledge things that were previously thought impossible — most notably, our involvement in nature’s processes. Particles (which are not really particles at all — there is no such thing as matter, only energy and little eddies in that energy field that manifest as what we consider the solid, tangible world of phenomena) cannot be tracked simultaneously for their position and their trajectory. One or the other can be observed, but not both. This is because it is our observation that determines the behavior of the “particle”. This is actually the ultimate discovery in what used to be called metaphysics and can now, thankfully, just be called “physics”. Nothing is pre-determined, nothing is solid, nothing is anything other than what our minds apprehend it to be. No observer = no manifested universe. This comes dangerously close to saying that we are, in a sense, all God, or at least that we have certain “powers” of manipulation previously only attributed to the divine. However, it doesn’t really threaten any theological tenets because one can always go one step more up the ladder and say that it is God who instilled this power in us, relegating humans to a state dependent on God much like the subatomic particles depend on us. Recommended reading: “The Tao of Physics” by Fritjof Capra and “The Self-Aware Universe” by Amit Goswami.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s