Describe what it means to call a claim metaphysical? Why is that important when considering the worthiness of ideological arguments?

Question

What will be an ideal response

Answer 1

The term metaphysical refers to assertions that are regarded as being true or false, independent of physical facts or circumstances. A claim is metaphysical if there is no conceivable evidence that could establish whether the claim was true or false. The claims might be true, they might be false, or they may be nonsensical. But whatever they are, scientific inquiry cannot confirm or disconfirm them. It may be impossible given the technology or the resources at hand in a given time or place to confirm or disconfirm a given claim, but those kinds of practical limitations alone do not make a claim metaphysical. For example, at one point it was technologically impossible to confirm or disconfirm the claim, "There was water on Mars." But today we have the technology and the resources to gather evidence to evaluate that claim. By contrast, there is no conceivable way, even if we had the technology and the funding, to confirm or to disconfirm a claim like "Pet cats have the same rights as pet angelfish." Some may wish to argue that the claim is true, but such an argument would depend on another metaphysical claim, perhaps, "All pet animals have the same rights." That argument would then qualify as ideological reasoning. And when we evaluate that argument, we would have problems with the very first test, the Test of the Truthfulness of the Premises, because we cannot know whether the axiomatic first principle about the equality of the rights of all species of pets is itself true.