Metaphysics Study Guide

📖 Core Concepts Metaphysics – The “first philosophy”; studies the most general structure of reality (what exists, how entities are categorized, and why). Ontology – The sub‑field that lists the most general kinds of being (substance, property, relation, fact, etc.). Existence – Usually treated as a second‑order property that a thing has when its other properties are instantiated; some argue it is a first‑order property like size or shape. Particulars vs. Universals – Particulars are concrete, non‑repeatable entities (a given apple). Universals are repeatable properties or relations (redness) that can be instantiated by many particulars. Concrete vs. Abstract Objects – Concrete objects occupy space‑time and can cause things; abstract objects (numbers, sets) are spaceless, timeless, and immutable. Modalities – Possibility = what could be the case; necessity = what must be the case. Possible‑world semantics evaluates modal statements by checking truth across worlds. Space‑Time Theories – Substantivalism (spacetime as a container) vs. Relationism (spacetime as a network of relations). A‑series vs. B‑series accounts of temporal order; Eternalism vs. Presentism for persistence. Causation – The relation where one event brings about another; can be deterministic (always produces the effect) or probabilistic (raises its probability). Major theories: regularity, nomic regularity, counterfactual, primitivism, eliminativism. Mind‑Body Problem – How mental states relate to physical states; positions include dualism, materialism/physicalism, idealism, neutral monism, functionalism. Free Will & Determinism – Incompatibilism denies coexistence; Compatibilism re‑defines freedom; Libertarianism affirms free will, Hard determinism denies it. Identity – Numerical (self‑same) vs. qualitative (indistinguishable) identity; Indiscernibility of Identicals (identicals share all properties) vs. Identity of Indiscernibles (share all properties → identical). Truth‑Bearers & Truth‑Makers – Statements/propositions can be true or false; a truth‑maker is an entity whose existence makes a statement true (e.g., a red tomato makes “the tomato is red” true). --- 📌 Must Remember Existence as second‑order: Instantiates other properties. Aristotle’s ten categories – substance is primary; Kant’s twelve categories split into quantity, quality, relation, modality. Bundle Theory vs. Substratum Theory – bundles = only properties; substratum = bare particular that holds properties. Mereological universalism: Any collection of entities forms a whole. Modal realism (David Lewis): Possible worlds are concrete, equally real entities. A‑series vs. B‑series – A‑series gives a moving present; B‑series orders events by “earlier than/later than” without a privileged now. Endurantism vs. Perdurantism – Whole‑present at each time vs. four‑dimensional temporal parts. Counterfactual theory of causation: “If C had not occurred, E would not have occurred.” Cartesian dualism: Mind and body are distinct substances that interact. Libertarian free will → rejects determinism; Compatibilist free will → freedom = actions aligned with one's motivations, even if deterministic. Leibniz’s Law (Identity of Indiscernibles): No two distinct entities share all properties. --- 🔄 Key Processes Analyzing a Modal Claim Identify the statement (e.g., “It is possible that p”). Translate to possible‑world semantics: ∃w (w is a possible world ∧ p is true in w). Determine the ontological status of worlds (realism vs. abstract). Evaluating a Causal Counterfactual Locate the actual cause C and effect E. Construct the nearest possible world where C is false. Check whether E is also false; if yes, C is a counterfactual cause. Determining Ontological Category Ask: Is the entity a substance, property, relation, or fact? Apply Aristotle’s hierarchy (substance > others) or Kant’s table of categories. Assessing Persistence For an object O, ask: Is O wholly present at each time (endurantism) or composed of temporal parts (perdurantism)? Use the “temporal parts” test: Does O have distinct parts at different times? Applying Ockham’s Razor List competing metaphysical theories. Count ontological commitments (entities, universals, possible worlds). Prefer the theory with fewer commitments unless explanatory power is lost. --- 🔍 Key Comparisons Bundle Theory vs. Substratum Theory Bundle: Particular = set of properties (no underlying “thing”). Substratum: Particular = bare entity that “holds” properties. Mereological Universalism vs. Moderatism vs. Nihilism Universalism: Any collection → whole. Moderatism: Only collections meeting extra conditions (e.g., touching) form wholes. Nihilism: No genuine wholes; only fundamental particles exist. A‑Series vs. B‑Series (Temporal Order) A‑Series: Past‑present‑future flow; requires a moving present. B‑Series: Static ordering by earlier‑than/later‑than relations; no privileged now. Endurantism vs. Perdurantism (Persistence) Endurantism: Whole object present at each moment, changes properties. Perdurantism: Object is a 4‑D “worm” with temporal parts. Deterministic vs. Probabilistic Causation Deterministic: Cause guarantees effect. Probabilistic: Cause raises likelihood of effect (e.g., smoking → cancer). Dualism vs. Physicalism vs. Idealism Dualism: Mind and body are distinct substances. Physicalism: All facts are physical (mental = brain states). Idealism: Reality is fundamentally mental. --- ⚠️ Common Misunderstandings “Existence is a property” – Not all philosophers agree; some treat it as a second‑order meta‑property rather than a ordinary property like shape. “Possible worlds are just stories” – Modal realists claim they are concrete entities; anti‑realists treat them as abstract or linguistic constructs. “All universals must be abstract objects” – Some bundle theorists deny independent abstract universals, treating them as mere property clusters. “Presentism means the past never existed” – Presentism holds that only present entities are real now; the past existed but is no longer real. “Determinism ⇒ No free will” – Compatibilists argue free will can survive determinism if defined in terms of internal coherence, not metaphysical indeterminacy. --- 🧠 Mental Models / Intuition “World‑tree” for modality – Visualize the actual world as one branch among many in a tree of possible worlds; necessity = true on every branch, possibility = true on at least one branch. “Lego bricks” for mereology – Think of wholes as LEGO constructions: universalism says any stack of bricks counts as a “whole”; moderatism says only stacks that are physically attached count; nihilism says only the individual bricks exist. “Time‑line vs. time‑tube” – B‑series is a flat line (static ordering); perdurantism is a tube where each slice is a temporal part of the same 4‑D object. --- 🚩 Exceptions & Edge Cases Mereological Nihilism – Denies all composites; only fundamental particles exist, even though everyday language talks about tables. Modal Primitiveism (Wilsch) – Holds that modal facts are basic and not reducible to other metaphysical facts. Haecceity in Bundle Theory – Some bundle theorists add a “thisness” property to guarantee uniqueness of particulars. Abstract objects with causal powers? – Generally abstract objects are causally inert, but some theories (e.g., Platonic realism) grant them indirect causal influence via instantiation. --- 📍 When to Use Which Choose Modal Realism when you need a robust ontology to evaluate counterfactuals and necessity across genuinely existing worlds (e.g., Lewis‑style analysis). Adopt Substratum Theory if you want a clear grounding for how properties “inhere” in objects without resorting to bundles. Apply Mereological Universalism for formal mereology proofs where any collection should count as a part of a whole. Use Counterfactual Causation when evaluating statements of the form “If C had not occurred, E would not have occurred.” Select Endurantism when explaining everyday persistence (e.g., a car remains the same car despite paint changes). Pick Perdurantism for discussions involving temporal parts, such as the Ship of Theseus over many replacements. --- 👀 Patterns to Recognize “All X are Y” → universal claim → check whether it presupposes a universal (property) that can be instantiated. Modal statements often hide an implicit possible‑world quantifier (∃w or ∀w). Causal explanations that invoke regularity without a law may be Humean; look for a law‑based (nomic) or counterfactual component. Identity puzzles usually involve two criteria: numerical vs. qualitative identity. Spot whether the problem hinges on Leibniz’s Law or its converse. --- 🗂️ Exam Traps Confusing “possible world” with “possible scenario.” – Realists treat worlds as concrete; anti‑realists treat them as abstract descriptions. Assuming “existence” is always a first‑order property. – Many standard metaphysical systems treat it as second‑order. Mixing A‑series and B‑series terminology. – A‑series involves a moving present; B‑series does not. Answer choices that blend the two are wrong. Identifying “abstract objects” as causally active. – By definition, they lack causal powers; any claim otherwise needs justification. Equating “deterministic causation” with “no randomness.” – Determinism concerns logical necessity, not the statistical nature of events; probabilistic causation can still be deterministic in a broader sense (e.g., laws of probability). ---