Metaphysics: A Very Short Introduction
- Downloads：2953
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-07-30 09:54:41
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Stephen Mumford
- ISBN：0199657122
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Metaphysics is traditionally one of the four main branches of philosophy， alongside ethics， logic and epistemology。 It is an area that continues to attract and fascinate many people， even though it is generally thought to be highly complex and abstract。 For some it is associated with the mystical or religious。 For others it is known through the metaphysical poets who talk of love and spirituality。 This Very Short Introduction goes right to the heart of the matter， getting to the basic and most important questions of metaphysical thought in order to understand the theory: What are objects？ Do colors and shapes have some form of independent existence？ Is the whole just a sum of the parts？ What is it for one thing to cause another rather than just being associated with it？ What is possible？ Does time pass？ By using simple questions to initiate thought about the basic issues around substance， properties， changes， causes， possibilities， time， personal identity， nothingness， and consciousness， Stephen Mumford provides a clear and down-to-earth path through this analytical tradition at the core of philosophical thought。
Reviews
Ilo
，
As a complete beginner I'm the target audience， and it feels to me like the book did a good job introducing the subject to me， I understood everything easily。 My only gripe with it is that it didn't go in depth as much as I'd have liked at some points， but that's to be expected of such a short introduction book。 As a complete beginner I'm the target audience， and it feels to me like the book did a good job introducing the subject to me， I understood everything easily。 My only gripe with it is that it didn't go in depth as much as I'd have liked at some points， but that's to be expected of such a short introduction book。 。。。more
Zoe Clark
，
A very basic overview of most the main metaphysical problems。 This does the job of a “very short introduction” perfectly。
Safdar
，
the author asks you to begin by doing metaphysics rather than telling you about what it is。 and then chapter by chapter he helps you do it。 you as a reader are involved in doing it。 he explains what metaphysics is in the last chapter。 its utility， the defense against arguments which term metaphysics useless。 i think that usefulness is the measure of anything's instrumentality。 the superiority of science in the realm of hard existence will remain uncontested due to its instrumentality。 further i the author asks you to begin by doing metaphysics rather than telling you about what it is。 and then chapter by chapter he helps you do it。 you as a reader are involved in doing it。 he explains what metaphysics is in the last chapter。 its utility， the defense against arguments which term metaphysics useless。 i think that usefulness is the measure of anything's instrumentality。 the superiority of science in the realm of hard existence will remain uncontested due to its instrumentality。 further i think metaphysics is really poetry's and literature's dull and boring sibling。 but we know that it is this group of siblings that we live for。 science is the foster-child。 Yes I know， but as the author said 'an incredulous stare is not an argument。 。。。more
Caomhghain
，
This was a very disappointing book。 It ambled from one light， irrelevant topic to another and eventually appears to justify Metaphysics because it can teach scientist the difference between causation and correlation。It can only harm the case for metaphysics。
Kasra
，
بنظرم برای درک یکسری مسائل که در فلسفه و به خصوص خود مسئله اصلی کتاب که متافیزیک هست بسیار مناسب هست و دید کلی مناسبی از بحث های این شاخه از فلسفه رو ارائه می‌کنه و مثال هایی آورده میشه که در ذهن میمونه。 همچنین مفاهیم رو به صورت ساده و قابل فهم میاره و در ارائه نمونه ها هم جانبگیری فکری نمیکنه。
Lizelle Van
，
I thought I liked Metaphysics until I read this。
Tanzia
，
Reading about the 'Ship of Theseus' identity theory brought me to this book and it has only made me realize I have a lot of reading to do on this subject before I can form a concrete opinion。 I'll update this when I've read more about the philosophy of identity。 Reading about the 'Ship of Theseus' identity theory brought me to this book and it has only made me realize I have a lot of reading to do on this subject before I can form a concrete opinion。 I'll update this when I've read more about the philosophy of identity。 。。。more
Dillon
，
Accessible to the point where it sometimes sacrifices building on interesting lines of reasoning to maintain accessibility。 Though I suppose I must expect that in an introduction。
Jonathan Thompson
，
FAR better than Knowledge and Philosophical Method。 Just as much waffle but the cause （haha） of the waffle is a symptom of the malaise which ails metaphysics rather than a failure to spark interest。
Bernie Gourley
，
Metaphysics is a subject that gets complicated quickly。 Like physics， it covers a wide swath of territory –many of the most fundamental questions of the universe -- but （unlike physics） it doesn’t hold much promise of zeroing in on definitive answers。 There’s just reasoning that is closer or farther from reflecting reality。 Mumford makes a sound decision to avoid the usual approach of starting with a mile-high overview of the subject， probably rightly concluding that it would become an indeciphe Metaphysics is a subject that gets complicated quickly。 Like physics， it covers a wide swath of territory –many of the most fundamental questions of the universe -- but （unlike physics） it doesn’t hold much promise of zeroing in on definitive answers。 There’s just reasoning that is closer or farther from reflecting reality。 Mumford makes a sound decision to avoid the usual approach of starting with a mile-high overview of the subject， probably rightly concluding that it would become an indecipherable mess quickly。 Instead， over ten chapters， Mumford starts with the simplest questions asked in metaphysics [relatively speaking] and proceeds to incrementally move toward the more complicated ones。 In Chapter 1， he asks， “What is a table？” There’s nothing particularly crucial about a table。 It’s just an item that is tangible， without a lot moving parts / complexity， and – thus -- is the kind of thing that few people would discount as being real。 However， even here at the shallow end of the pool， questions pile up about what even such a simple item really is， and under what circumstances it can be said to continue to be that thing。 [e。g。 One gets into Theseus’s ship kind of questions – i。e。 if one replaces all the individual parts of a table to what degree does it remain the same object。] Chapter 2 shifts from what the first chapter called “particulars” to what are herein called properties。 [e。g。 The redness of a fire engine。 The roundness of a racetrack。] Are properties real？ Could you take them away from a particular？ If you could， what – if anything – would it be that remained。 Chapter 3’s question is， “Are wholes just the sum of their parts？” In the case of the aforementioned table， this question might seem a lot easier to answer than if the object in question is oneself。 We all intuitively feel that we are more than the sum of our bones， and skin， brain， etc。 But are we？ Even if a child’s toy blocks are nothing more than the summed blocks， might not a human being or a dog be vastly more。 I will propose that chapters four through six are closely related （though no such division is made by the book’s table of contents。） All of the questions addressed by these chapters hinge on our experience of time， and none of them would be questions if we didn’t experience one thing after another。 Chapter four explores the nature of change。 Chapter five is about cause and effect。 The subject of cause raises all sorts of interesting questions because we often see examples of caused effects， but we also seem to read cause and effect into situations in which they don’t really exist。 （e。g。 The often-sited error of mistaking correlation for causation。） Chapter six takes on the subject of time directly。 There are many different theories of time。 With respect to metaphysic’s most basic question of “what is real？” one quickly comes up against different hypotheses。 Some think only the present is real。 Some believe the past and present are real， but the future couldn’t possibly be。 Still others think the whole experience of time is an illusion。 Chapter seven gets into the metaphysical question that is both most intimately interesting and among the most challenging， and that is， “What is a person？” This is interesting in that we all tend to feel we know what a person is， at least one feels that one knows what one is， but views abound – from the Buddhist notion that the self is an illusion to various religious approaches proposing we are fundamentally a soul or spirit， to materialist interpretations that suggest – in all likelihood – we are the sum of our parts and their activities。 Chapters eight and nine retreat once more from tangibles to ask what is the nature of a possibility （ch。 8） and whether nothing can actually be thought of as a thing [and what the ramifications are of doing so] （ch。 9。） Both of these cases are interesting because they have no simple answer and in different cases different answers suggest themselves as truer。 When a possibility is of high probability it may seem sound to treat it as if it were a [potential] reality， but following that reasoning toward the lowest probability happenings quickly results in absurdities。 The final chapter gets around to the overarching question of what metaphysics is， but it also deals with the question of whether metaphysics is relevant。 Some say metaphysics amounts to little more than mental masturbation。 Others feel that science has replaced metaphysics in all the important ways and more。 The book has a “further reading” section at the end。 There are a few graphics throughout the text， but the book is primarily textual。 I found this book to be quite useful。 I think the author took a smart approach with its organization and does a good job of avoiding getting lost in the weeds （which is a perennial risk in these types of works。） Mumford uses pop culture references and the like when they make approachable examples， and -- in general -- does a good job of keeping an eye on readability。 If you’re looking for an introduction to metaphysics， this volume is worth checking out。 。。。more
Mohammad Hanifeh
，
کتاب مجموعه‌ای از نکات （بعضاً جالب） بود که حقیقتاً نمی‌دونم با دونستنشون چی‌کار کنم الآن！ :）））البته خودِ نویسنده هم بنده خدا صفحهٔ آخر گفت:متافیزیک به ما فهمی، هرچند بلااستفاده، اما عمیق از ماهیتِ واقعیت می‌دهد。 خلاصه که فهممون از ماهیتِ واقعیت بیشتر شده。 منتها نمی‌دونیم به چه دردمون می‌خوره。 :）））
Caleb Jenkinson
，
I thought this book was very good。 I have read several things on Metaphysics and have even written a paper on it， but did not reach the level of understanding that I have now after reading this book。 It also has inspired me to read more！
Van Jones
，
Better than most of the "Very Short Inroduction" books that I have read。 Better than most of the "Very Short Inroduction" books that I have read。 。。。more
James
，
I found this disappointing。 The author writes in a bumptious and presumptuous tone which quickly becomes irritating。 It's not that he does not bring across the processes of contemporary metaphysics， rather that he completely fails to make a case for their vitality。 Why should one perform these mental gymnastics？ Other than as mental exercises， we are never given any indication of where the asking of these questions might lead。 What might ensue once one has concocted a theory of whether absence i I found this disappointing。 The author writes in a bumptious and presumptuous tone which quickly becomes irritating。 It's not that he does not bring across the processes of contemporary metaphysics， rather that he completely fails to make a case for their vitality。 Why should one perform these mental gymnastics？ Other than as mental exercises， we are never given any indication of where the asking of these questions might lead。 What might ensue once one has concocted a theory of whether absence is present， or what a person is。 It's not so much that the author makes metaphysics of no practical consequence， but that he makes of it a road to nowhere essential whatsoever。 None of his examples have any profundity about them。 I am sure this was not the case with classical metaphysicists， who were genuinely digging into the nature of reality。 The contemporary variety is just the dog-end of a previously fine tradition， practised by irrelevant men who appear to have no spiritual or ethical grounding。 Where the author proposes a defence， he actually drives a nail into a coffin。 A shame， because metaphysics is a great concept， which used to mean something。 。。。more
N
，
On the one hand I didn't learn anything because I picked this up as preliminary research for the scientific underpinnings of a fantasy universe， on the other hand I learned that metaphysics has nothing to do with the science I was looking for as fantasy underpinning so I guess I did learn something。 Other than that， nothing in this book was new， but given I banged it out in just over an hour， no harm no foul。 Consider this the end-of-chapter summary notes of books like The Stuff Of Thought。 Plat On the one hand I didn't learn anything because I picked this up as preliminary research for the scientific underpinnings of a fantasy universe， on the other hand I learned that metaphysics has nothing to do with the science I was looking for as fantasy underpinning so I guess I did learn something。 Other than that， nothing in this book was new， but given I banged it out in just over an hour， no harm no foul。 Consider this the end-of-chapter summary notes of books like The Stuff Of Thought。 Platonism: all circles are imperfect instance of platonic circle。 Nominalism: platonic circle is just words blah。 But then if I destroy all circles do I destroy circularity？ Aristotle: immanent reality here， properties of real instances。 But can destroy circles keep circularity because of all circles that have and will exist。Complexity fine， but what is simple？ No evidence for atomism。Counterfactual dependence theory of causation: RCT。 But my getting better shouldn't depend on some other group of ppl （placebo sample）Wittgenstein: individual strands in rope don't go from one end to the next。 But together they do。 Same with psychological continuity。Lockes memory criterion of personal identity: false memories， delusions，Positive metaphysics: JFK killed by bullet。 But what about absence of protective vest？ How do we distinguishFact: a true statement。 Or: linking a particular with a propertyHume thought metaphysics shouldn't exist。 Possible defence by Kant's critique of pure reason， which also lowered ambition of MP。 about our structure of thinking about the world， rather than the world itself。Science has upper hand of empiricism in proving theories。 In other fields like philosophy， you can merely disprove them by leading to absurdity or contradiction。Find metaphysical theory that does not conflict with empirical scientific theory？ 。。。more
Mihai
，
Good book， what I liked most about it is the main idea of starting with particular examples and ending with the actual definition of what metaphysics is about。
March
，
Very surface level and the backwards chapter order doesn't work。 My least favorite so far of VSI series。 Very surface level and the backwards chapter order doesn't work。 My least favorite so far of VSI series。 。。。more
Steph De Mel
，
This is easily one of the best installments in the VSI series。 Mumford's writing is clear， concise， and incredibly engaging; I felt， as I read this， as though I were sitting in a lecture theatre and watching him teach。 Consequently， I got a lot of enjoyment out of this VSI， and found the subject matter incredibly interesting。 Highly， highly recommended！ This is easily one of the best installments in the VSI series。 Mumford's writing is clear， concise， and incredibly engaging; I felt， as I read this， as though I were sitting in a lecture theatre and watching him teach。 Consequently， I got a lot of enjoyment out of this VSI， and found the subject matter incredibly interesting。 Highly， highly recommended！ 。。。more
Connor DeLoach
，
A good introduction for someone with zero knowledge
James C
，
Mumford provides a quick and easy summary of metaphysics， and the topics in contention。 These topics include the nature of time， personhood， causation， change and many others。 I’d recommend it to anybody who is interested in these questions as the book provides a brief yet detailed summary of the conversation surrounding these topics。
Christopher C。 Fuchs
，
Having read a bit about metaphysics， I purchased this book to explore a little deeper。 Unfortunately I found it dry and， more importantly， inconsequential。 The author failed to convince me that metaphysics has any application to the modern world。 The author acknowledges that metaphysics is often considered "useless" or "childish" but does not adequately rebut those challenges。 The decision to save the chapter "What is Metaphysics？" until the very end was a contributing mistake， which the author Having read a bit about metaphysics， I purchased this book to explore a little deeper。 Unfortunately I found it dry and， more importantly， inconsequential。 The author failed to convince me that metaphysics has any application to the modern world。 The author acknowledges that metaphysics is often considered "useless" or "childish" but does not adequately rebut those challenges。 The decision to save the chapter "What is Metaphysics？" until the very end was a contributing mistake， which the author does as a sort of build-up that is ultimately unsatisfying。 Despite pushing through the book， I wouldn't have read past that chapter had it properly been the first。 Some people may give up on the book before reaching the context provided at the end （I nearly did several times）。 In short， the author does not adequately link metaphysics to real world questions or problems， nor is there much treatment of its history--which could be interesting。 Metaphysics seems obsessed only with itself， and the author seems to imply that we should welcome that。 In a final section titled “The Value of Metaphysics” （which is barely a page long）， he writes: “…we don’t do metaphysics so that we can stay healthy and wealthy: we stay healthy and wealthy so that we can do metaphysics。” As a result， I was left with my own question of why I should care about metaphysics at all。 。。。more
Igor
，
Despite short， it is very well organized。 I have only missed any comment about the relation: metaphysics and religions beliefs。
Windi Astuti
，
Metaphysics is one of the traditional four main branches of philosophy， alongside ethics， logic， and epistemology。 As a beginner， this part of very short introduction series help me understand metaphysics by provoking different questions in every chapter。 I'm interested in the subject because in metaphysics， we have our reasoning as our guide to how the world could be or how it should be。 I have questions remain unanswered and by doing metaphysics activity I （might） get the answers。 I can't clas Metaphysics is one of the traditional four main branches of philosophy， alongside ethics， logic， and epistemology。 As a beginner， this part of very short introduction series help me understand metaphysics by provoking different questions in every chapter。 I'm interested in the subject because in metaphysics， we have our reasoning as our guide to how the world could be or how it should be。 I have questions remain unanswered and by doing metaphysics activity I （might） get the answers。 I can't classify myself as a genius， but at least I am qualified as human （based on Locke theory） -- so I can use my little grey cells。 。。。more
Lu Wangshan
，
I feel a good portion of the discussions do not bear useful information without also discussing related science:- "whole-vs-part" -> complex system/emergence- "what is a person" -> neuroscience- "causality" -> probability/Bayesian probability I feel a good portion of the discussions do not bear useful information without also discussing related science:- "whole-vs-part" -> complex system/emergence- "what is a person" -> neuroscience- "causality" -> probability/Bayesian probability 。。。more
Marts （Thinker）
，
An easy-to-read philosophical overview of this theme。。。
Michael
，
Good book to get your brain in the right place for launching into the study of metaphysics。。。don’t expect anything more than that， as the author didn’t intend anything other than that。
dogman
，
The best short introduction I've read so far。 simply 10/10 The best short introduction I've read so far。 simply 10/10 。。。more
Eric T。 Voigt
，
"。。。 it depends on one's view of the relation between the world， language， and truth。" （pg。 93） That's everything for ya。 "。。。 it depends on one's view of the relation between the world， language， and truth。" （pg。 93） That's everything for ya。 。。。more
Ha Pham
，
Basically all of your shower thoughts in one book。
Jen
，