Beyond Matter: Why Science Needs Metaphysics

by Roger Trigg

Does science have all the answers? Can it even deal with abstract reasoning beyond the world we experience? How can we ensure that the physical world is sufficiently ordered to be intelligible to humans? How can mathematics, a product of human minds, unlock the secrets of the physical universe? Should all such questions be considered inadmissible if science cannot settle them? Metaphysics has traditionally been understood as reasoning beyond the reach of science, sometimes even claiming realities beyond its grasp. Because of this, metaphysics is often contemptuously dismissed by scientists and philosophers who wish to remain within the bounds of what can be scientifically proven. Yet scientists at the frontiers of physics unwittingly engage in metaphysics, as they are now happy to contemplate whole universes that are, in principle, beyond human reach. Roger Trigg challenges those who deny that science needs philosophical assumptions. Trigg claims that the foundations of science themselves have to lie beyond science. It takes reasoning apart from experience to discover what is not yet known and this metaphysical reasoning to imagine realities beyond what can be accessed. “In  Beyond Matter , Roger Trigg advances a powerful, persuasive, fair-minded argument that the sciences require a philosophical, metaphysical foundation. This is a brilliant book for newcomers to the philosophy of science and experts alike.” —Charles Taliaferro, professor of philosophy, St. Olaf College

Genres: Philosophy, Science, Metaphysics

176 pages, Hardcover

First published October 15, 2015

Reviews

[Helene M · Rating 4 out of 5]

Intelligent

Beyond Matter premise is that philosophy is a pivotal part of the scientific process. Science emphasizes on the hows of nature , but this book disputes that the whys are at least as crucial .

I felt the language was a little baffling at times. Long sentences can illustrate a elaboration that sometimes seems pointless . (*yawn*)

Ex. " The reduction of science to a mere species of social practice may please those who disliked the scientific imperialism which makes science the only path to truth ."

My impression of this book is that it probably has a good chance for the academia mostly due to its style and manner of writing . It's light tone and non threating approach to atheism was discussed which usually has a filter when science-philosophy are involved . Today when belief and research seem at odds with each other . This book did have a window of binary wisdom .

[Melissa Travis · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fresh and concise argument presented without unnecessary jargon. One of those rare books that you immediately want to reread.

[Peter Van Os · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was like a sandwich. Chewy, nourishing sourdough on both ends but a bit vague and mushy in the middle.

I thought he did a great job of disassembling physicalist determinism and the idea of science as a source of ultimate truth, but less good of a job at warding off relativism by explaining how things can still be falsifiable.

Overall still a pretty good sandwich and something I was hungry for, being in a pretty naturalistic/empirical field.

[Joseph Yue · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite having to read this work for an assignment, I actually enjoyed reading it. As much as I agree with most of the contents, however, the lack of a well established structure is fatal. I can but sympathise with Roger Trigg, an honest philosopher who, in the danger of losing his job under the challenge of scientism, fights back to keep his living. In fact, if I were at the danger of losing my job and desperately wanted to keep it, I probably would not ramble any more eloquently than him. But a piece of rambling, no matter how eloquent, is still discursive, just like a chord of dissonance, no matter how well performed, is still disturbing. This book is essentially like a collection of tapas, each distinctively delicious, being dumped together into a pot stew. Nevertheless, even this dubious stew is proven substantially better than the empty plates of materialism and scientism - both figuratively and literally.

[Samuel Eastlund · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really appreciate Trigg's book. It raises a very important contradiction which seems apparent in scientific circles: a disdain for metaphysical thinking in parallel with a direct engagement in metaphysical ways of solving problems. Trigg's thesis is that physicists have (appropriately) surpassed the narrow-minded epistemology of the recent past, and both verificationism and the falsifiability criteria are not quite appropriate for doing theoretical physics. When people are willing to start positing entities which are entirely outside of our universe as an explanation for why our world is the way it is (a multiverse as an example) they are dealing with metaphysical entities - they are beyond physics.

This important point was to me clouded by unclear writing and a difficult to follow structure. I am absolutely willing to concede that Trigg knows what he is talking about, but I really feel like this book needed some work in readability. I often found it hard to related what was being discussed with the text around it, and didn't really feel like the book was giving me anything other than orbiting the thesis stated above.

The point needs to be made, but maybe it needs to be made in a different way.

[Mills College Library]

110 T828 2015