Talk:Origin Manipulation/@comment-189.19.100.98-20121114201702/@comment-26241075-20121115021734

You are right and wrong in this description of metaphysics. It is true that metaphysics is not "real" in the sense that it is divorced from reality (because we can make a distinction between a note or thing in general and that particular note or thing) but you are wrong that metaphysics is not "real" to the extent that terms of metaphysics are intelligible only on the basis of particular experiences. Metaphysics is bound to the physical and it is also entirely constituted by the physical even though it is not the physical.

I also think that any conversation about language and metaphor implies metaphysics. This is because we understand the content or meaning of the metaphor as different than the experiences that necessarily constitute the terms of the metaphor. Because we make a distinction between the terms of the metaphor and the meaning of the metaphor it is always implied that there is some metaphysical plane or sphere in which the metaphor exists such that it has meaning that is accessible to all who have the sufficient experience to put the metaphor together such that they can understand it. Because we reason/think entirely through metaphors by finding threads of continuity or unification in all of our distinct and different experiences, this means that metaphysics defines all thinking. Because we use thinking and rationality to make sense of and understand the world it can be said that metaphysics defines reality while also being defined by it.

Thinking about metaphysics this way can explain how you came to your own understanding of language, music, creativity and metaphors. This is because I described metaphysics as a system that is always self referential. In order to understand something you already have to understand it.