Branches of Metaphysics

7/25/2019 Branches of Metaphysics

1/22

BRANCHES OF METAPHYSICS

Metaphysicsis the branch of philosophy concerne !ith the nat"reof e#istence$ bein% an the !orl& Ar%"ably$ 'etaphysics is the fo"nation ofphilosophy( Aristotlecalls it )*rst philosophy) +or so'eti'es ,"st )!iso')-$

an says it is the s"b,ect that eals !ith )*rst ca"ses an the principles ofthin%s)&

It as.s /"estions li.e( )0hat is the nat"re of reality1)$ )Ho! oes the !orle#ist$ an !hat is its ori%in or so"rce of creation1)$ )2oes the !orl e#isto"tsie the 'in1)$ )Ho! can the incorporeal 'in a3ect the physicalboy1)$ )If thin%s e#ist$ !hat is their ob,ecti4e nat"re1)$ )Is there a 5o +or'any %os$ or no %o at all-1)

Ori%inally$ the 5ree. !or )'etaphysi.a) +literally )after physics)- 'erelyinicate that part of Aristotle6s oe"4re !hich ca'e$ in itsse/"ence$ after those chapters !hich ealt !ith physics& 7ater$ it !as'isinterprete by 'eie4al co''entators on the classical te#ts as that!hich is abo4e or beyon the physical$ an so o4er ti'e 'etaphysics hase3ecti4ely beco'e the st"y of that !hich transcens physics&

Aritstotle ori%inally split his 'etaphysics into three 'ain sections an thesere'ain the 'ain branches of 'etaphysics(

Ontolo%y +the st"y of bein% an e#istence$ incl"in% the e*nitionan classi*cation of entities$ physical or 'ental$ the nat"re of their

properties$ an the nat"re of chan%e-

Nat"ral Theolo%y +the st"y of 5o$ incl"in% the nat"re of reli%ion anthe !orl$ e#istence of the i4ine$ /"estions abo"t the creation$ anthe 4ario"s other reli%io"s or spirit"al iss"es-

8ni4ersal Science +the st"y of *rst principles of lo%ic an reasonin%$s"ch as the la! of no contraiction-

E#istence an Conscio"sness

E#istence +the fact or state of contin"e bein%- is a#io'atic +'eanin%that it oes not rest "pon anythin% in orer to be 4ali$ an it cannotbe pro4en by any )'ore basic) pre'ises- beca"se it is necessary forall .no!le%e an it cannot be enie !itho"t concein% its tr"th +aenial of so'ethin% is only possible if e#istence e#ists-& )E#istencee#ists) is therefore an a#io' !hich states that there is so'ethin%$ asoppose to nothin%&

Conscio"sness is the fac"lty !hich percei4es an ienti*es thin%s thate#ist& In his fa'o"s for'"lation )Co%ito er%o s"') +)I thin. therefore Ia')-$ Ren9 2escartesar%"e that conscio"sness is a#io'atic$ beca"seyo" cannot lo%ically eny yo"r 'in6s e#istence at the sa'e ti'eas "sin% yo"r 'in to o the enyin%&

Ho!e4er$ !hat 2escartesi not 'a.e clear is that conscio"sness isthe fac"lty that percei4es that !hich e#ists$ so it re/"iresso'ethin% o"tsie of itself in orer to f"nction( it re/"ires$ an isepenent "pon$ e#istence& The pri'acy of e#istence states thate#istence is pri'ary an conscio"sness is seconary$ beca"se therecan be no conscio"sness !itho"t so'ethin% e#istin% to percei4e&E#istence is inepenent of$ 'a.es possible$ an is a prere/"isite ofconscio"sness& Conscio"sness is not responsible for creatin% reality( itis co'pletely epenent "pon reality&
http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_aristotle.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_aristotle.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logic.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_descartes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_descartes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_aristotle.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logic.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_descartes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_descartes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_aristotle.html


2/22

Min an Matter

Early ebates on the nat"re of 'atter centere on ientifyin% a sin%le"nerlyin% principle +Monis'-( !ater !as clai'e byThales$ air by Ana#i'enes$ Apeiron +'eanin% )the "ne*ne in*nite)-

by Ana#i'aner$ an *re by Heraclit"s& 2e'ocrit"sconcei4ean ato'ic theory +Ato'is'- 'any cent"ries before it !as accepte by'oern science&

The nat"re of the 'in an its relation to the boy has also e#ercisethe best brains for 'illennia& There is a lar%e o4erlap here!ith Philosophy of Min$ !hich is is the branch of philosophy thatst"ies the nat"re of the 'in$ 'ental e4ents$ 'entalf"nctions$ 'ental properties an conscio"sness$ an their relationshipto the physical boy&

In the :;th Cent"ry$ 2escartespropose a 2"alistsol"tioncalle S"bstance 2"alis' +or Cartesian 2"alis'- !hereby the 'inan boy are totally separate an i3erent( the 'ental oes not ha4ee#tension in space$ an the 'aterial cannot thin.&

Iealists$ li.e Bishop 5eor%e Ber.eleyan the 5er'an Iealistschool$clai' that 'aterial ob,ects o not e#ist "nless percei4e+Iealis'isessentially a Monist$ rather than 2"alist$ theory in that there is a sin%le"ni4ersal s"bstance or principle-&

Bar"ch Spino?th Cent"ry has thereforebeen 4ario"s 4ersions of Physicalis'+or Materialis'-$ aMonistsol"tion!hich e#plains 'atter an 'in as 'erely aspects of each other$or eri4ati4es of a ne"tral s"bstance&

Ob,ects an their Properties

The !orl contains 'any ini4i"al thin%s +ob,ects or partic"lars-$both physical an abstract$ an !hat these thin%s ha4e in co''on!ith each other are calle "ni4ersals or properties& Metaphysicians areintereste in the nat"re of ob,ects an their properties$ anthe relationship bet!een the t!o +see the sectionson Realis'an No'inalis'-&

The proble' of "ni4ersals arises !hen people start to consier in !hatsense it is possible for a property to e#ist in 'ore than one place at thesa'e ti'e +e&%& a re car an a re rose-& It see's clear that there are

'any re thin%s$ for e#a'ple$ b"t is there an e#istin% property of6reness61 An if there is s"ch a thin% as 6reness6$ !hat .in of thin% isit1 See the section on Realis'for a f"rther isc"ssion of this&

Any ob,ect or entity is the s"' of its parts +see Holis'-& The ientity ofan entity co'pose of other entities can be e#plaine by reference tothe ientity of the b"ilin% bloc.s$ an ho! they are interactin%& Aho"se can be e#plaine by reference to the !oo$ 'etal$ an %lassthat are co'bine in that partic"lar !ay to for' the ho"se@ or it co"lbe e#plaine in ter's of theato's that for' it +see the sectionson Ato'is'an Re"ctionis'-&

Ientity an Chan%e
http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_monism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_thales.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_anaximenes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_anaximander.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_heraclitus.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_democritus.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_atomism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_philosophy_of_mind.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_descartes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_dualism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_idealism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_berkeley.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/movements_german_idealism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_idealism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_monism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_dualism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_spinoza.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_russell.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_physicalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_materialism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_monism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_nominalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_holism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_atomism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_reductionism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_monism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_thales.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_anaximenes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_anaximander.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_heraclitus.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_democritus.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_atomism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_philosophy_of_mind.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_descartes.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_dualism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_idealism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_berkeley.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/movements_german_idealism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_idealism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_monism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_dualism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_spinoza.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_russell.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_physicalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_materialism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_monism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_nominalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_holism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_atomism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_reductionism.html


3/22

Ientity is !hate4er 'a.es an entity e*nable an reco%ni


4/22

Altho"%h Par'eniesenie the o! of ti'e co'pletely in ancient ti'es$echoe 'ore recently by the British Iealist&M&E& Mc Ta%%art +:D = :>G-$'"ch ebate in both philosophy an physics has centre on the irection ofti'e +)ti'e6s arro!)-$ an !hether it is re4ersible or sy''etrical& As for!hether ob,ects persist o4er ti'e$ then

the en"rantis' per"rantis'ichoto'y escribe abo4e applies&

Reli%ion an Spirit"ality

Theolo%y is the st"y of 5o an the nat"re of the 2i4ine& This is so'eti'esconsiere a !hole separate branch of philosophy$ the Philosophy ofReli%ion+see that sectionfor 'ore etail-& It as.s /"estions li.e(

2oes the 2i4ine inter4ene irectly in the !orl +Theis'-$ or is its solef"nction to be the *rst ca"se of the "ni4erse +2eis'-1

Is there one 5o +Monotheis'-$ 'any %os +Polytheis'- or no%os +Atheis'or H"'anis'-$ or is it i'possible to.no! +A%nosticis'-1

Are 5o an the "ni4erse ientical +Pantheis'$ Monis'- or arethey i3erent +Panentheis'$ 2"alis'-1

2oes reli%io"s belief epens on faith an re4elation +Fieis'-$ oron reason +2eis'-1

0ithin 0estern Philosophy$ Philosophy of Reli%ion$ an theolo%y in %eneral$reache it pea. !ith Meie4al Christian schools of tho"%ht li.e Scholasticis'&

Space an Ti'e

A traitional Realistposition is that ti'e an space has e#istenceinepenent fro' the h"'an 'in& Iealists$ ho!e4er$ clai' that space an

ti'e are 'ental constr"cts "se to or%ani


5/22

in so'e possible !orl$ e4en if not in the act"al !orl& This iea of possible!orls !as *rst intro"ce by 5ottfrie 7eibni??:- in his theory of Moal Realis'&

The concept of necessity an contin%ency +another ter' "se in philosophyto escribe the possibility of so'ethin% happenin% or not happenin%- is alsocentral to so'e of the ar%"'ents "se to ,"stify the e#istence or non=e#istence of 5o$ notably the Cos'olo%ical Ar%"'ent fro' Contin%ency +seethe section on Philosophy of Reli%ionfor 'ore etails-&

Abstract Ob,ects an Mathe'atics Bac. to Top

So'e philosophers hol that there are abstract ob,ects +s"chas n"'bers$ 'athe'atical ob,ects an *ctional entities- an"ni4ersals +properties that can be possesse by '"ltiple ob,ects$ s"ch as

)reness) or )s/"areness)-$ both of !hich are o"tsie of space an ti'eanor are ca"sally inert&

Realis'$ best e#e'pli*e by Platoan his Platonic For's$ teaches that"ni4ersals really e#ist$ inepenently an so'eho! prior to the !orl&

On the other han$ +No'inalis'-$ hols that there is really no s"ch thin% asabstract ob,ects$ !hich really e#ist only as na'es$ beca"se a sin%le ob,ectcannot e#ist in '"ltiple places si'"ltaneo"sly&

Moerate Realis'$ as espo"se by Aristotlea'on% others$ tries to *n so'e

'ile %ro"n bet!een No'inalis'an Realis'$ an hols that there isno real' as s"ch in !hich "ni4ersals e#ist$ b"t rather they are locate inspace an ti'e !here4er they happen to be 'anifest& Concept"alis'$ theoctrine that "ni4ersals e#ist only !ithin the 'in an ha4e no e#ternalors"bstantial reality$ is also an inter'eiate sol"tion&

Other positions s"ch as For'alis' an Fictionalis' o not attrib"te anye#istence to 'athe'atical entities$ an are anti=Realist&

The Philosophy of Mathe'atics o4erlaps !ith 'etaphysics in this area&

2eter'inis' an Free 0ill

2eter'inis'is the philosophical proposition that e4ery e4ent$ incl"in%h"'an co%nition$ ecision an action$ is ca"sally eter'ine by an "nbro.enchain of prior occ"rrences& Th"s$ there is at any instant only onephysically possible f"t"re$ an norano'$ spontaneo"s$ 'ysterio"s or 'irac"lo"s e4ents e4er occ"r&

This posits that there is no s"ch thin% as Free 0ill$ !here rational a%ents can

e#ercise control o4er their o!n actions anecisions& Inco'patibilists +or Har 2eter'inists- li.e Bar"ch Spino


6/22

Cos'olo%y is the branch of 'etaphysics that eals !ith the !orl as thetotality of all pheno'ena in space an ti'e& Historically$ it !as often fo"nein reli%ion@ in 'oern "se it aresses /"estions abo"t the !orl an the"ni4erse !hich arebeyon the scope of physical science& Cos'o%ony ealsspeci*cally !ith the ori%in of the "ni4erse$ b"t the t!o concepts are closely

relate&

Pantheists$ s"ch as Spino


7/22

2i3erent 4arieties of Reliabilis' s"%%est that either( :- ,"sti*cation isnot necessary for .no!le%e pro4ie it is areliably=pro"ce tr"ebelief@ or >- ,"sti*cation is re/"ire b"t any reliable co%niti4eprocess +e&%& 4ision- is s"cient ,"sti*cation&

Yet another school$ Infallibilis'$ hols that a belief '"st not only betr"e an ,"sti*e$ b"t that the ,"sti*cation of the belief'"st necessitate its tr"th$ so that the ,"sti*cation for the belief '"stbe infallible&

Another ebate foc"ses on !hether ,"sti*cation is e#ternal or internal(

E#ternalis'hols that factors ee'e )e#ternal) +'eanin% o"tsie ofthe psycholo%ical states of those !ho are %ainin% the .no!le%e- canbe conitions of .no!le%e$ so that if the rele4ant facts ,"stifyin% aproposition are e#ternal then they are acceptable&

Internalis'$ on the other han$ clai's that all .no!le%e=yielin%conitions are !ithin the psycholo%ical states of those !ho %ain.no!le%e&

As recently as :$ the A'erican philosopher E'"n 5ettier calle thistraitional theory of .no!le%e into /"estion by clai'in% that there arecertain circ"'stances in !hich one oes not ha4e .no!le%e$ e4en !hen allof the abo4e conitions are 'et +his 5ettier=cases-& For e#a'ple( S"pposethat the cloc. on ca'p"s +!hich .eeps acc"rate ti'e an is !ell 'aintaine-stoppe !or.in% at ::(Gp' last ni%ht$ an has yet to be repaire& On 'y!ay to 'y noon class$ e#actly t!el4e ho"rs later$ I %lance at the cloc. anfor' the belief that the ti'e is ::(G& My belief is tr"e$ of co"rse$ since theti'e is inee ::(G& An 'y belief is ,"sti*e$ as I ha4e no reason to o"btthat the cloc. is !or.in%$ an I cannot be bla'e for basin% beliefs abo"t theti'e on !hat the cloc. says& Nonetheless$ it see's e4ient that I o not.no! that the ti'e is ::(G& After all$ if I ha !al.e past the cloc. a bitearlier or a bit later$ I !o"l ha4e ene "p !ith a false belief rather than atr"e one&

Ho! Is Lno!le%e Ac/"ire1

Propositional .no!le%e can be of t!o types$ epenin% on its so"rce(

a priori +or non=e'pirical-$ !here .no!le%e is possible inepenentlyof$ or prior to$ any e#perience$ an re/"ires only the "se of reason +e&%&.no!le%e of lo%ical tr"ths an of abstract clai's-@ or

a posteriori +or e'pirical-$ !here .no!le%e is possible onlys"bse/"ent$ or posterior$ to certain sense e#periences$ in aition tothe "se of reason +e&%& .no!le%e of the colo"r or shape of a physicalob,ect$ or .no!le%e of %eo%raphical locations-&

Lno!le%e of e'pirical facts abo"t the physical !orl !ill necessarilyin4ol4e perception$ in other !ors$ the "se of thesenses& B"t all .no!le%ere/"ires so'e a'o"nt of reasonin%$ the analysis of ata an the ra!in%of inferences& Int"ition is often belie4e to be a sort of irect access to.no!le%e of the a priori&

Me'ory allo!s "s to .no! so'ethin% that !e .ne! in the past$ e4en$perhaps$ if !e no lon%er re'e'ber the ori%inal ,"sti*cation& Lno!le%e canalso be trans'itte fro' one ini4i"al to another 4ia testi'ony +that is$ 'y,"sti*cation for a partic"lar belief co"l a'o"nt to the fact that so'e tr"ste

so"rce has tol 'e that it is tr"e-&
http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_externalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_internalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_externalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_internalism.html


8/22

There are a fe! 'ain theories of .no!le%e ac/"isition(

E'piricis'$ !hich e'phasi


9/22

it is a part$ so that the re%ress oes not procee accorin% to a patternof linear ,"sti*cation&

Fo"nherentis' is another position !hich is 'eant to be a "ni*cationof fo"nationalis' an coherentis'&

BRANCHES OF ETHICS

Ethics+or Moral Philosophy- is concerne !ith /"estions of ho! peopleo"%ht to act$ an the search for a e*nition of ri%ht con"ct +ienti*e as the

one ca"sin% the %reatest %oo- an the %oo life +in the sense of a life !orth

li4in% or a life that is satisfyin% or happy-&

Ancient 5ree. Ethics

Socrates$ as recore in Plato6s ialo%"es$ is c"sto'arily re%are asthe father of 0estern ethics& He asserte that people !ill nat"rally o !hatis %oo pro4ie that they .no! !hat is ri%ht$ an that that e4il or baactions are p"rely the res"lt ofi%norance( )There is only one %oo$.no!le%e$ an one e4il$ i%norance)& Hee/"ate .no!le%e an !iso' !ith self=a!areness +'eanin% to be a!areof e4ery fact rele4ant to a person6s e#istence- an 4irt"e an happiness& So$in essence$ he consiere self=.no!le%e an self=a!areness to bethe essential %oo$ beca"se the tr"ly !ise +i&e& self=a!are- person !ill .no!!hat is ri%ht$ o !hat is %oo$ an therefore be happy&

Accorin% to Aristotle$ )Nat"re oes nothin% in 4ain)$ so it is only !hen aperson acts in accorance !ith their nat"re an thereby reali


10/22

attach'ents& In partic"lar$ se# an se#"al esire are to be a4oie as the%reatest threat to the inte%rity an e/"ilibri"' of a 'an6s 'in& Accorin%to Epictet"s$ic"lt proble's in life sho"l not be a4oie$ b"t rathere'brace as spirit"al e#ercises neee for the health of the spirit&

Pyrrho$ the fo"nin% *%"re of Pyrrhonian S.epticis'$ ta"%ht that onecannot rationally ecie bet!een !hat is %oo an !hat is ba altho"%h$%enerally spea.in%$ self=interest is the pri'ary 'oti4e of h"'an beha4io"r$an he !as isincline to rely "ponsincerity$ 4irt"e or Altr"is'as'oti4ations&

H"'anis'$ !ith its e'phasis on the i%nity an !orth of all people an theirability to eter'ine ri%ht an !ron% p"rely by appeal to "ni4ersal h"'an/"alities +especially rationality-$ can be trace bac. toThales$ enophanes ofColophon +G;? = D? B&C&-$ Ana#a%oras$ Pericles +c& G => B&C&-$ Prota%oras$ 2e'ocrit"san the historian Th"cyies +c& ? =

;G B&C&-& These early 5ree. thin.ers !ere all instr"'ental in the 'o4e a!ayfro' a spirit"al 'orality base on the s"pernat"ral$ an the e4elop'ent ofa 'ore h"'anistic freetho"%ht +the 4ie! that beliefs sho"l be for'e onthe basis of science an lo%ic$ an not be in"enceby e'otion$ a"thority$ traition or o%'a-&

Nor'ati4e Ethics Bac. to Top

Nor'ati4e Ethics +or Prescripti4e Ethics- is the branch of ethics concerne!ith establishin% ho! thin%s sho"l or o"%ht to be$ ho! to 4al"e the'$ !hichthin%s are %oo or ba$ an !hich actions are ri%ht or !ron%& It atte'pts to

e4elop a set ofr"les %o4ernin% h"'an con"ct$ or a set of nor's for action&

Nor'ati4e ethical theories are "s"ally split into three 'aincate%ories( Conse/"entialis'$ 2eontolo%y an irt"e Ethics(

Conse/"entialis'+or Teleolo%ical Ethics- ar%"es that the 'orality of anaction is contin%ent on the action6s o"tco'eor res"lt& Th"s$ a 'orallyri%ht action is one that pro"ces a %oo o"tco'e or conse/"ence&Conse/"entialist theories '"st consier /"estions li.e )0hat sort ofconse/"ences co"nt as %oo conse/"ences1)$ )0ho is the pri'arybene*ciary of 'oral action1)$ )Ho! are the conse/"ences ,"%e an

!ho ,"%es the'1)So'e conse/"entialist theories incl"e(

o 8tilitarianis'$ !hich hols that an action is ri%ht if it leas tothe 'ost happiness for the %reatest n"'ber of people+)happiness) here is e*ne as the 'a#i'i


11/22

o!n self=interest$ b"t 'a.es no clai's abo"t !hat anyoneelse o"%ht to o& 8ni4ersal E%ois' hols that e4eryone sho"lact in !ays that are in their o!n interest&

o Asceticis'$ !hich is$ in so'e !ays$ the opposite of E%ois'in

that it escribes a life characteri


12/22

o Pl"ralistic 2eontolo%y is a escription of the eontolo%ical ethicspropo"ne by 0&2& Ross +:D;; = :;:-& He ar%"es that thereare se4en pri'a facie "ties !hich nee to be ta.eninto consieration !hen eciin% !hich "ty sho"l be acte"pon( bene*cence +to help other people to increase their

pleas"re$ i'pro4e their character$ etc-@ non='ale*cence +toa4oi har'in% other people-@ ,"stice +to ens"re people %et !hatthey eser4e-@ self=i'pro4e'ent +to i'pro4eo"rsel4es-@ reparation +to reco'pense so'eone if yo" ha4eacte !ron%ly to!ars the'-@ %ratit"e +to bene*t people !hoha4e bene*te "s-@ pro'ise=.eepin% +to act accorin% to e#plicitan i'plicit pro'ises$ incl"in% the i'plicit pro'ise to tell thetr"th-& In so'e circ"'stances$ there 'aybe clashes orconicts bet!een these "ties an a ecision '"stbe 'ae !hereby one "ty 'ay )tr"'p) another$ altho"%h thereare no har an fast r"les an no *#e orer of si%ni*cance&

o Contractarian Ethics +or the Moral Theory of Contractarianis'-clai's that 'oral nor's eri4e theirnor'ati4e force fro' theiea of contract or '"t"al a%ree'ent& It hols that 'oral actsare those that !e !o"lall a%ree to if !e !ere "nbiase$ an that'oral r"les the'sel4es are a sort of a contract$ an thereforeonly people !ho "nerstan an a%ree to the ter's of thecontract are bo"n by it& The theory ste's initially fro'political Contractarianis'an the principle of socialcontract e4elope byTho'as Hobbes$ean=ac/"esRo"ssea"anohn 7oc.e$ !hich essentially hols that

people %i4e "p so'e ri%hts to a %o4ern'ent anor othera"thority in orer to recei4e$ or ,ointly preser4e$ socialorer& Contract"alis' is a 4ariation on Contractarianis'$altho"%h base 'ore on the Lantianieas that ethics is anessentially interpersonal 'atter$ an that ri%ht an !ron% are a'atter of !hether !e can ,"stify the action to other people&

irt"e Ethics$ foc"ses on the inherent character of a person rather thanon the nat"re or conse/"ences of speci*c actions perfor'e& Thesyste' ienti*es 4irt"es +those habits an beha4io"rs that !ill allo! aperson to achie4e)e"ai'onia)$ or !ell bein% or a %oo life-$

co"nsels practical !iso' to resol4e any conicts bet!een 4irt"es$ anclai's that a lifeti'e of practisin% these 4irt"es leas to$ or in e3ectconstit"tes$ happiness an the %oo life&

o E"ai'onis'is a philosophy ori%inate by Aristotlethate*nes ri%ht action as that !hich leas to )!ell bein%)$ an!hich can be achie4e by a lifeti'e of practisin% the 4irt"es inone6s e4eryay acti4ities$ s"b,ect to the e#ercise of practical!iso'& It !as *rst a4ocate by Platoan is partic"larlyassociate !ith Aristotle$ an beca'e the pre4ailin% approach toethical thin.in% in the Ancientan Meie4alperios& It fell o"t offa4o"r in the Early Moernperio$ b"t has recently "ner%one a'oern res"r%ence&

o A%ent=Base Theories %i4e an acco"nt of 4irt"e base ono"r co''on=sense int"itions abo"t !hich character traitsare a'irable +e&%& bene4olence$ .inness$ co'passion$ etc-$!hich !e can ientify by loo.in% at the people !e a'ire$o"r 'oral e#e'plars&

o Ethics of Care !as e4elope 'ainly by Fe'inist!riters$ an

calls for a chan%e in ho! !e 4ie! 'orality an the 4irt"es$shiftin% to!ars the 'ore 'ar%inali


13/22

!o'en$ s"ch as ta.in% care of others$ patience$ the ability ton"rt"re$ self=sacri*ce$ etc&

Meta=Ethics is concerne pri'arily !ith the 'eanin% of ethical ,"%e'ents$an see.s to "nerstan the nat"re ofethicalproperties$ state'ents$ attit"es$ an ,"%e'ents an ho! they 'aybe s"pporte or efene& A 'eta=ethical theory$ "nli.e a nor'ati4e ethicaltheory +see belo!-$ oes not atte'pt to e4al"ate speci*c choices as bein%better$ !orse$ %oo$ ba or e4il@ rather it tries to e*ne the essential'eanin% an nat"re of the proble' bein% isc"sse& It concerns itself !ithsecon orer /"estions$ speci*callythe se'antics$ episte'olo%y an ontolo%y of ethics&

The 'a,or 'eta=ethical 4ie!s are co''only i4ie into t!o ca'ps( Moral

Realis' an Moral Anti=Realis'(

Moral Realis'(Moral Realis' +or Moral Ob,ecti4is'- hols that there are ob,ecti4e'oral 4al"es$ so that e4al"ati4e state'ents are essentially fact"alclai's$ !hich are either tr"e or false$ an that their tr"th or falsityare inepenent of o"r beliefs$ feelin%s or other attit"es to!ars thethin%s bein% e4al"ate& It is a co%niti4ist4ie! in that it holsthat ethical sentencese#press 4ali propositions an aretherefore tr"th=apt&There are t!o 'ain 4ariants(

o Ethical Nat"ralis'This octrine hols that there are ob,ecti4e 'oral properties of!hich !e ha4e e'pirical .no!le%e$ b"t that these propertiesare re"cible to entirely non=ethical properties& Itass"'es co%niti4is' +the 4ie! that ethical sentencese#press propositions an can therefore be tr"e or false-$ an thatthe 'eanin%s of these ethical sentences can be e#presseas nat"ral properties !itho"t the "se of ethical ter's&

o Ethical Non=Nat"ralis'

This octrine +!hose 'a,or apolo%ist is 5& E& Moore- hols thatethical state'ents e#press propositions +in that sense it is alsoco%niti4ist- that cannot be re"ce to non=ethicalstate'ents +e&%& )%ooness) is ine*nable in that it cannot bee*ne in any other ter's-& Mooreclai'e that a nat"ralisticfallacy is co''itte by any atte'pt to pro4e a clai' abo"tethics by appealin% to a e*nition in ter's of one or'ore nat"ral properties +e&%& )%oo) cannot be e*ne inter'sof )pleasant)$ )'ore e4ol4e)$ )esire)$ etc-&Ethical Int"itionis' is a 4ariant of Ethical Non=Nat"ralis' !hichclai's that !e so'eti'es ha4e int"iti4e a!areness of 'oral

properties or of 'oral tr"ths&

Moral Anti=Realis'(Moral Anti=Realis' hols that there are no ob,ecti4e 'oral 4al"es$ anco'es in one of three for's$ epenin% on !hether ethical state'entsare belie4e to be s"b,ecti4e clai's +Ethical S"b,ecti4is'-$ not %en"ineclai's at all +Non=Co%niti4is'- or 'ista.en ob,ecti4e clai's +MoralNihilis' or Moral S.epticis'-(

o Ethical S"b,ecti4is'$ !hich hols that there are no ob,ecti4e

'oral properties an that 'oral state'ents are 'ae tr"e orfalse by the attit"es anor con4entions of the obser4ers$ or
http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_moral_realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_cognitivism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_naturalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_nonnaturalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_moore.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_moore.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_moral_anti-realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_subjectivism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_moral_realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_cognitivism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_naturalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_nonnaturalism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_moore.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_moore.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_moral_anti-realism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_subjectivism.html


14/22

that any ethical sentence 'erely i'pliesan attit"e$ opinion$ personal preference or feelin%hel byso'eone&There are se4eral i3erent 4ariants(

Si'ple S"b,ecti4is'( the 4ie! that ethical state'entsreect senti'ents$ personal preferences anfeelin%s ratherthan ob,ecti4e facts&

Ini4i"alist s"b,ecti4is'( the 4ie! +ori%inally p"t for!arby Prota%oras- that there are as 'any istinctscales of%oo an e4il as there are ini4i"als in the !orl+e3ecti4ely a for' of E%ois'-&

Moral Relati4is'+or Ethical Relati4is'-( the 4ie! that for athin% to be 'orally ri%ht is for it to be appro4e of by

society$ leain% to the concl"sion that i3erent thin%s areri%ht for people in i3erent societies ani3erent perios inhistory&

Ieal Obser4er Theory( the 4ie! that !hat is ri%ht iseter'ine by the attit"es that a hypothetical iealobser4er +a bein% !ho is perfectly rational$ i'a%inati4e aninfor'e- !o"l ha4e&

o Non=Co%niti4is'$ !hich hols that ethical sentences are neithertr"e nor false beca"se they o not e#press %en"ine propositions$

th"s i'plyin% that 'oral .no!le%e is i'possible& A%ain thereare i3erent 4ersions(

E'oti4is'( the 4ie!$ efene by A&& Ayeran C& 7&Ste4enson +:?D = :;- a'on% others$ that ethicalsentences ser4e 'erely to e#press e'otions$ an ethical,"%e'ents are pri'arily e#pressions of one6s o!nattit"e$ altho"%h to so'e e#tent they arealso i'perati4es 'eant to chan%e the attit"es an actionsof other listeners&

Prescripti4is' +or 8ni4ersal Prescripti4is'-( the 4ie!$propo"ne by R&M& Hare +:: = >??>-$ that 'oralstate'ents f"nction as i'perati4es !hichare "ni4ersali


15/22

Pro,ecti4is'( the 4ie! that /"alities can be attrib"te to +or)pro,ecte) on- an ob,ect as if those /"alities act"allybelon% to it& Pro,ecti4is' in Ethics +ori%inally proposeby 2a4i H"'ean 'ore recently cha'pione by Si'onBlac.b"rn- is associate by 'any !ith Moral Relati4is'$

an is consierecontro4ersial$ e4en tho"%h it !asphilosophical orthoo#y thro"%ho"t '"ch of the >?thCent"ry&

Moral Fictionalis'( the 4ie! that 'oral state'ents sho"lnot be ta.en to be literally tr"e$ b"t 'erely a"sef"l *ction&This has le to char%es of ini4i"als clai'in% to holattit"es that they o not really ha4e$ an therefore are inso'e !ay insincere&

o Moral Nihilis'$ !hich hols that ethical clai's are

%enerally false& It hols that there are no ob,ecti4e 4al"es +thatnothin% is 'orally %oo$ ba$ !ron%$ ri%ht$ etc&- beca"se thereare no 'oral tr"ths +e&%& a 'oral nihilist !o"l say that '"rer isnot !ron%$ b"t neither is it ri%ht-&Error Theory is a for' of Moral Nihilis'!hichco'bines Co%niti4is'+the belief that 'oral lan%"a%e consistsoftr"th=apt state'ents- !ith Moral Nihilis'+the belief that thereare no 'oral facts-&

o Moral S.epticis'$ !hich hols that no one has any 'oral.no!le%e +or the stron%er clai' that no one can ha4e any 'oral

.no!le%e-& It is partic"larly oppose to Moral Realis' +seeabo4e- an perhaps its 'ost fa'o"s proponent is FrierichNiet


16/22

altho"%h infor'ation that co'es fro' escripti4e ethics is also "se inphilosophical ar%"'ents&

2escripti4e Ethics is so'eti'es referre to as Co'parati4e Ethics beca"seso '"ch acti4ity can in4ol4e co'parin% ethical syste's( co'parin% the

ethics of the past to the present@ co'parin% the ethics of onesociety to another@ an co'parin% the ethics !hich people clai' tofollo! !ith the act"al r"les of con"ct !hich o escribe their actions&

Applie Ethics

Applie Ethics is a iscipline of philosophy that atte'pts to apply ethicaltheory to real=life sit"ations& Strict$ principle=base ethical approaches oftenres"lt in sol"tions to speci*c proble's that are not "ni4ersallyacceptable or i'possible to i'ple'ent& Applie Ethics is '"ch 'ore reay toincl"e the insi%hts of psycholo%y$ sociolo%y an other rele4ant areas of

.no!le%e in its eliberations& It is "se in eter'inin% p"blic policy&

The follo!in% !o"l be /"estions of Applie Ethics( )Is %ettin% an abortioni''oral1)$ )Is e"thanasia i''oral1)$ )Is ar'ati4e action ri%ht or !ron%1)$)0hat are h"'an ri%hts$ an ho! o !e eter'ine the'1) an )2o ani'alsha4e ri%hts as !ell1)

So'e topics fallin% !ithin the iscipline incl"e(

Meical Ethics( the st"y of 'oral 4al"es an ,"%'ents as they applyto 'eicine& Historically$ 0estern 'eical ethics 'ay be trace to%"ielines on the "ty of physicians in anti/"ity$ s"ch asthe Hippocratic Oath +at its si'plest$ )to practice an prescribe to thebest of 'y ability for the %oo of 'y patients$ an to try to a4oihar'in% the')-$ an early rabbinic$ M"sli' an Christian teachin%s&Si# of the 4al"es that co''only apply to 'eical ethics isc"ssionsare( Bene*cence +a practitioner sho"l act in the best interest of thepatient$ Non='alfeasance +)*rst$ o no har')-$A"tono'y +the patienthas the ri%ht to ref"se or choose their treat'ent-$ "stice +concernin%the istrib"tion of scarce health reso"rces$ an the ecision of !ho%ets !hat treat'ent-$ 2i%nity +both the patient an the practitionerha4e the ri%ht to i%nity-$ Honesty +tr"thf"lness an respect for theconcept of infor'e consent-&

Bioethics( concerns the ethical contro4ersies bro"%ht abo"t bya4ances in biolo%y an 'eicine& P"blic attention !as ra!n to these/"estions by ab"ses of h"'an s"b,ects in bio'eical e#peri'ents$especially "rin% the Secon 0orl 0ar$ b"t !ith recent a4ancesin bio=technolo%y$ bioethics has beco'e a fast=%ro!in% acae'ic anprofessional area of in/"iry& Iss"es incl"e consieration of clonin%$ste' cell research$ transplant trae$ %enetically 'oi*e foo$ h"'an%enetic en%ineerin%$ %eno'ics$ infertility treat'ent$ etc$ etc

7e%al Ethics( an ethical coe %o4ernin% the con"ct of people en%a%ein the practice of la!& Moel r"les "s"ally aress the client=la!yerrelationship$ "ties of a la!yer as a4ocate in a4ersary proceein%s$ealin%s !ith persons other than clients$la! *r's an associations$ p"blic ser4ice$ a4ertisin% an 'aintainin%the inte%rity of the profession& Respect of clientcon*ences$ cano"r to!ar the trib"nal$ tr"thf"lness in state'ents toothers$ an professional inepenence are so'e of the e*nin%feat"res of le%al ethics&


17/22

B"siness Ethics( e#a'ines ethical principles an 'oral or ethicalproble's that can arise in a b"siness en4iron'ent& Thisincl"es Corporate Social Responsibility$ a concept!hereby or%ani


18/22

a 4ie!point in his "$rthashastra"!hich recalls both the Chinese 7e%alistsan the later Political Realisttheories of Niccol Machia4elli&

Early M"sli' political philosophy !as inistin%"ishable fro'Isla'ic reli%io"s tho"%ht& The :th Cent"ry Arabicscholar Ibn Lhal"n +:>

= :?- is consiere one of the %reatest political theorists$ an his e*nitionof %o4ern'ent as )an instit"tion !hich pre4ents in,"stice other than s"ch asit co''its itself) is still consiere a s"ccinct analysis& 0ith the recente'er%ence of Isla'ic raicalis' as a political 'o4e'ent$ political tho"%hthas re4i4e in the M"sli' !orl$ an the political ieas of M"ha''aAb"h +:D = :?G-$ Al=Af%hani +:DD ? :D;-$ SayyiQ"tb +:? =:-$ Ab"l Ala Ma!"i +:? = :;-$ Ali Shariati +: = :;;-an R"hollah Lho'eini +:?> = :D- ha4e %aine increasin% pop"larity inthe >?th Cent"ry&

Sec"lar political philosophy be%an to e'er%e in E"rope after cent"ries

of theolo%ical political tho"%ht "rin% the Renaissance&Machia4elli6sin"ential !or.s$ "The !rince"an "The %iscourses"$ escribea pra%'atican conse/"entialist4ie! of politics$ !here %oo an e4il are'ere 'eans to an en& The En%lish'anTho'as Hobbes$ !ell .no!n for histheory of the social contract +the i'plie a%ree'ents by !hich peoplefor' nations an 'aintain a social orer-$ !ent on to e#pan this prototypeof Contractarianis'in the *rst half of the :;th Cent"ry$ c"l'inatin% inhis "&eviathan"of :G:$ !hich 4er%e onTotalitarianis'&

Moern Political Philosophy

2"rin% the A%e of Enli%hten'ent$ E"rope entere a sort of %olen a%e ofpolitical philosophy !ith the !or. of s"ch thin.ers asohn 7oc.e+!hose ieason 7iberalis'an 7ibertarianis'are reecte in the A'erican 2eclaration ofInepenence an !hose in"ence on oltairean Ro"ssea"!ascritical-$ean=ac/"es Ro"ssea"+!hose contractarianistpolitical philosophyin"ence the French Re4ol"tion$ an !hose :;> !or. "The ocialontract"beca'e one of the 'ost in"ential !or.s of political philosophy inthe 0estern traition-$ an the Baron e Montes/"ie" +:DD = :;GG- +!hoseartic"lation of theseparation of po!ers !ithin %o4ern'ent is i'ple'ente in'any constit"tions thro"%ho"t the !orl toay-&

An i'portant concept"al istinction +!hich contin"es to this ay- !as 'aeat this ti'e bet!een state +a set of en"rin%instit"tions thro"%h !hich po!erco"l be istrib"te an its "se ,"sti*e-$ an %o4ern'ent +a speci*c %ro"pof people !ho occ"py the instit"tions of the state$ an create the la!s by!hich the people are bo"n-& T!o 'a,or /"estions !ere broachebyEnli%hten'entpolitical philosphers( one$ by !hat ri%ht or nee o peoplefor' states@ an t!o$ !hat is the best for' for a state&

Capitalis'$ !ith its e'phasis on pri4ately=o!ne 'eans of pro"ction anthe 'ar.et econo'y$ beca'e instit"tionali


19/22

of Nationalis'$ Fascis'anTotalitarianis'be%an to ta.e shapein Italy an Na


20/22

Britain often sa! African sc"lpt"re as "%ly$ b"t ,"st a fe! ecaes later$E!arian a"iences sa! the sa'e sc"lpt"res as bein% bea"tif"l-&

"%'ents of aesthetic 4al"e can also beco'e lin.e to ,"%e'entsof econo'ic$ political or 'oral 4al"e +e&%& !e 'i%ht ,"%e an e#pensi4e car

to be bea"tif"l partly beca"se it is esirable as a stat"s sy'bol$ or !e 'i%ht,"%e it to be rep"lsi4e partly beca"se it si%ni*es for "s o4er=cons"'ptionan o3ens o"r political or 'oral 4al"es&-

Aestheticians /"estion ho! aesthetic ,"%e'ents can be "ni*e across artfor's +e&%& !e can call a person$ a ho"se$ a sy'phony$ a fra%rance an a'athe'atical proof bea"tif"l$ b"t !hat characteristics o they share !hich%i4e the' that stat"s1-

It sho"l also be borne in .in that the i'precision an a'bi%"ity arisin%fro' the "se of lan%"a%e in aesthetic ,"%e'ents can lea to

'"ch conf"sion +e&%& t!o co'pletely i3erent feelin%s eri4e fro' t!oi3erent people can be represente by an ientical e#pression$ ancon4ersely a 4ery si'ilar response can be artic"late by 4ery i3erentlan%"a%e-&

0hat is Art1

In recent years$ the !or art is ro"%hly "se as an abbre4iation for creati4eart or *ne art$ !here so'e s.ill is bein% "se to e#press the artistUscreati4ity$ or to en%a%e the a"ienceUs aesthetic sensibilities$ or to ra! thea"ience to!ars consieration of the *ner thin%s& If the s.ill bein% "se is

'ore lo!bro! or practical$ the !or )craft) is often "se instea of art&Si'ilarly$ if the s.ill is bein% "se in a co''ercial or in"strial !ay$ it 'aybe consiere )esi%n) +or )applie art)-& So'e ha4e ar%"e$ tho"%h$ thatthe i3erence bet!een *ne art an applie art or crafts has 'ore to o!ith 4al"e ,"%'ents 'ae abo"t the art than any clear e*nitionali3erence&

Since the 2aaist art 'o4e'ent of the early >?th Cent"ry$ it can nolon%er e4en be ass"'e that all art ai's at bea"ty& So'e ha4e ar%"e that!hate4er art schools an '"se"'s an artists %et a!ay !ith sho"l beconsiere art$ re%arless of for'al e*nitions +the so=calle instit"tionale*nition of art-&

So'e co''entators +incl"in%ohn 2e!ey- s"%%est that it is the process by!hich a !or. of art is create or 4ie!e that 'a.es it art$ notany inherent feat"re of an ob,ect or ho! !ell recei4e it is by the instit"tionsof the art !orl +e&%& if a !riterintene a piece to be a poe'$ it is one!hether other poets ac.no!le%e it or not$ !hereas if e#actly the sa'e setof !ors !as !ritten by a ,o"rnalist as notes$ these !o"l not constit"te apoe'-&

Others$ incl"in% 7eo Tolstoy +:D>D = ::?-$ clai' that !hat 'a.esso'ethin% art +or not- is ho! it is e#perience by its a"ience$ not theintention of its creator&

F"nctionalists li.e Monroe Bearsley +::G = :DG- ar%"e that !hether or nota piece co"nts as art epens on !hat f"nction it plays in apartic"lar conte#t +e&%& the sa'e 5ree. 4ase 'ay play a non=artistic f"nctionin one conte#t = carryin% !ine = an anartistic f"nction in another conte#t-&

At the 'etaphysical an ontolo%ical le4el$ !hen !e !atch$ for e#a'ple$ aplay bein% perfor'e$ are !e ,"%in% one !or. of art +the !holeperfor'ance-$ or are !e ,"%in% separately the !ritin% of the play$ theirection an settin%$ the perfor'ances of the 4ario"s actors$ the cost"'es$
http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_dewey.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_dewey.html


21/22

etc1 Si'ilar consierations also apply to '"sic$ paintin%$ etc& Since the riseof concept"al art in the >?th Cent"ry$ the proble' is e4en 'ore ac"te +e&%&!hat e#actly are !e ,"%in% !hen !e loo. at Any 0arhol6s )rillo )oxes1-

Aestheticians also /"estion !hat the 4al"e of art is& Is art a 'eans of %ainin%

so'e .in of .no!le%e1 Is it a toolofe"cation or inoctrination or enc"lt"ration1 Is it perhaps ,"st politics byother 'eans1 2oes art %i4e "s an insi%ht into theh"'an conition1 2oes it'a.e "s 'ore 'oral1 Can it "plift "s spirit"ally1 Mi%ht the 4al"e of art forthe artist be /"ite i3erent than its 4al"e for the a"ience1 Mi%ht the 4al"eof art to society be i3erent than its 4al"e to ini4i"als1

Aesthetic 8ni4ersals

The conte'porary A'erican philosopher 2enis 2"tton +: = - hasienti*e se4en "ni4ersal si%nat"res in h"'an aesthetics& Altho"%h there are

possible e#ceptions an ob,ections to 'any of the'$ they represent a"sef"l startin% point for the consieration of aesthetics(

E#pertise or irt"osity +technical artistic s.ills are c"lti4ate$reco%ni


22/22

nat"re& His near conte'poraryMo-$ 0illia' Ho%arth +:; = :;-an E'"n B"r.ehope to re"ce bea"ty to so'e list of attrib"tes$ !hileothers li.e a'es Mill +:;; = :D- an Herbert Spencer +:D>? = :?-

stro4e to lin. bea"ty to so'e scienti*c theory of psycholo%y or biolo%y&

REFERENCES

www.philosophybasics.com/

branch _ aesthetics .html


branch _ metaphysics

.html


branch _

political

.html

www.philosophybasics.com/branch_epistemology.html

www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethics.html
http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_hegel.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_schopenhauer.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_intuitionism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_burke.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_aesthetics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_aesthetics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_aesthetics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_metaphysics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_metaphysics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_metaphysics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_metaphysics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_political.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_political.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_political.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_political.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_political.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_political.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_hegel.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_schopenhauer.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_intuitionism.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_burke.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_aesthetics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_metaphysics.htmlhttp://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_political.html

Documents

Branches of Metaphysics