[quote="Veritas Aequitas" post_id=492482 time=1611559613 user_id=7896]
Note this from Wiki;
[size=130][b]Rejections of metaphysics[/b][/size]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysi ... etaphysics
Metametaphysics is the branch of philosophy that is concerned with the foundations of metaphysics.[34] A number of individuals have suggested that much or all of metaphysics should be rejected, a metametaphysical position known as metaphysical deflationism[a][35] or ontological deflationism.[36]
In the 16th century, [b]Francis Bacon[/b] rejected scholastic metaphysics, and argued strongly for what is now called empiricism, being seen later as the father of modern empirical science.
In the 18th century, [b]David Hume[/b] took a strong position, arguing that all genuine knowledge involves either mathematics or matters of fact and [b]that metaphysics[/b], which goes beyond these, is [b]worthless[/b]. He concludes his Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748) with the statement:
[list]If we take in our hand any volume [book]; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. [b]Commit it then to the flames[/b]: for [b]it [metaphysics] can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion[/b].[37][/list]
Thirty-three years after Hume's Enquiry appeared, I[b]mmanuel Kant[/b] published his Critique of Pure Reason. Although he followed Hume in [b]rejecting much of previous metaphysics[/b], he argued that there was still room for some synthetic a priori knowledge, concerned with matters of fact yet obtainable independent of experience.[38] These included fundamental structures of space, time, and causality. He also argued for the freedom of the will and the existence of "things in themselves", the ultimate (but unknowable) objects of experience.
[b]Wittgenstein[/b] introduced the concept that metaphysics could be influenced by theories of aesthetics, via logic, vis. a world composed of "atomical facts".[39][40]
In the 1930s, [b]A.J. Ayer[/b] and [b]Rudolf Carnap[/b] endorsed Hume's position; Carnap quoted the passage above.[41] They argued that metaphysical statements are neither true nor false but meaningless since, according to their verifiability theory of meaning, a statement is meaningful only if there can be empirical evidence for or against it. Thus, while Ayer rejected the monism of Spinoza, he avoided a commitment to pluralism, the contrary position, by holding both views to be without meaning.[42] Carnap took a similar line with the controversy over the reality of the external world.[43] While the logical positivism movement is now considered dead (with Ayer, a major proponent, admitting in a 1979 TV interview that "nearly all of it was false"),[44] it has continued to influence philosophy development.[45]
[/quote]
...and then Kaiser Basileus solved philosophy.