設萬維讀者為首頁 萬維讀者網 -- 全球華人的精神家園 廣告服務 聯繫我們 關於萬維
 
首  頁 新  聞 視  頻 博  客 論  壇 分類廣告 購  物
搜索>> 發表日誌 控制面板 個人相冊 給我留言
幫助 退出
 
中國現代哲學家學會  
發現自己的絕對力量,它會震驚世界  
網絡日誌正文
Metaphysics: The Last Stronghold of Aristotle 2025-07-09 03:59:59


Metaphysics: The Last Stronghold of Aristotle Needs a Rebirth


For over two thousand years, Aristotle's metaphysics stood as the towering edifice of Western philosophical thought. It was not merely a contribution; it was a foundation. From his "four causes" to the classification of substance and accident, from his logic to his concept of the unmoved mover, Aristotle offered a framework that ordered the world of knowledge, provided scaffolding for medieval theology, and silently shaped modern science’s early rational structure. Yet today, this proud structure—so deeply ingrained in our intellectual DNA—finds itself out of joint with reality. Not because it was wrong in its time, but because reality itself has changed, or rather, our access to its structure has matured.


The final stronghold of Aristotle—metaphysics—now calls not for renovation, but for rebirth. We are not merely updating ancient categories; we are witnessing a categorical shift, a paradigm realignment that necessitates a new language, a new structure, and a new metaphysical vision. That vision, in part, is emerging through Instancology, a structured philosophical system that replaces the static with the dynamic, the substantial with the instantiative, the teleological with the relational.


I. Why Aristotle’s Metaphysics Once Reigned Supreme


Aristotle's metaphysics was a grand synthesis of order. He divided reality into substances and their properties, saw causes as fourfold (material, formal, efficient, and final), and grounded being in actuality and potentiality. Everything had its place, its nature, and its end. His logic—syllogistic, deductive—provided tools to make sense of it all.


More importantly, Aristotle's metaphysics wasn’t isolated. It governed biology, cosmology, ethics, and politics. Thomas Aquinas used it to define God; Islamic philosophers adapted it to understand creation; early scientists borrowed its clarity. Its comprehensiveness was its power.


But that power came at a price. It required stability. Essences had to be fixed, causes identifiable, the cosmos intelligible in hierarchical terms. That vision—cosmic, structured, deterministic—was deeply suited


That vision—cosmic, structured, deterministic—was deeply suited to a world that seemed still, ordered, and divine. But once the microscope, telescope, and calculus cracked open the fabric of matter and motion, cracks also began appearing in the Aristotelian edifice. The Copernican revolution displaced Earth from the center. The Cartesian method severed substance from certainty. Newton’s laws made efficient causality central, while Hume cast doubt on causation itself. By the time Kant and Heidegger came on stage, metaphysics was no longer a stage of certainty, but a site of existential questioning.


Still, Aristotle endured—less as a doctrine, more as a shadow. His assumptions lingered in notions of identity, essence, subject, and object. Even postmodern critiques rarely escaped the foundational logic he laid down. As long as metaphysics remained about “what is,” about beings and their categories, Aristotle’s ghost remained enthroned.


But the 21st century demands more than critique. It demands reconstruction. Not of Aristotle’s house, but of metaphysics itself—from its foundation upward.



---


II. Why Metaphysics Must Be Reborn, Not Revised


To speak of metaphysics today is to risk obsolescence. In an era obsessed with data, computation, and functionalism, metaphysics is dismissed as speculative luxury. But this dismissal misses the point. What needs rejection is not metaphysics per se, but its outdated structure—its metaphysical model of metaphysics.


What is this outdated model? First, it is based on substance ontology: that things exist because they are something in themselves. Second, it relies on categorical fixity: that things possess essences, and relations are secondary. Third, it is teleological: explaining the world by its ends, goals, or functions. Finally, it privileges a top-down causal scheme rooted in the visible, measurable, and pre-defined.


This model fails to accommodate today’s discoveries:


Quantum indeterminacy undermines stable substance and fixed cause.


Complex systems theory shows emergence from bottom-up relations.


Neuroscience and AI challenge the notion of a self-contained “self” or “soul.”


Linguistic and cultural relativism question the fixity of meaning and identity.



In short, reality has become dynamic, instantiated, relational, and layered. The very conditions under which Aristotle's metaphysics thrived—conceptual clarity, fixed ontologies, and logical deduction—are now inadequate. What we need is not a renovation of metaphysics, but its rebirth under new philosophical conditions.



---


III. Enter Instancology: The Structured Rebirth of Metaphysics


Instancology does not negate metaphysics—it rescues it from static decay and rebirths it through structure. Where Aristotle saw being as substance and essence, Instancology sees instance as the fundamental unit of reality—not static being, but instantiation within relational fields.


At the heart of Instancology is a 2x2 ontological framework:


AA (Absolutely Absolute): The source, unchanging and issuing all reality—timeless.


RA (Relatively Absolute): Entities like logic, law, math, and life—formless but absolute within this instance.


AR (Absolutely Relative): The experienced world, filtered through categories of meaning and cognition.


RR (Relatively Relative): The purely relational, contextual, and symbolic—language, culture, opinion.



This layered structure replaces the rigid hierarchy of Aristotle with a matrix of relation, cognition, and issuance. There is no substance beneath phenomena, only instances—structured manifestations issued from AA into the relational field of AR and RR, mediated by RA. The world is not being but instancing. Not essence but structured appearance grounded in metaphysical issuance.


Instancology, thus, redefines metaphysics in four essential ways:


1. From Substance to Instance: There are no eternal substances; only structured manifestations within one issued instance.



2. From Essence to Issuance: Reality is not grounded in inner essences but in the issuing act of AA.



3. From Fixed Categories to Relational Layers: Reality is layered by how it appears (RR), how it is cognitively structured (AR), how it is logically and lawfully governed (RA), and how it ultimately comes to be (AA).



4. From Teleology to Meta-Structure: Ends no longer define existence. Instead, structure does. Relations, cognition, and issuance form the true scaffolding of metaphysical order.





---


IV. Why This Rebirth Matters Now


The consequences of metaphysical stagnation are not merely academic. Our civilizational paralysis—ethical confusion, technological alienation, political cynicism—reflects an underlying metaphysical vacuum. If reality is not knowable in structure, then we drift among opinions. If identity is not grounded in something deeper than symbol or desire, then subjectivity becomes a game of masks. If truth is not mapped within a structured metaphysical field, then science floats without foundation, and ethics without direction.


Instancology returns structure to metaphysics—but without regression. It re-establishes an absolute (AA) without dogma, reaffirms reason (RA) without rationalism, recasts appearance (AR) without illusion, and orders relation (RR) without reduction.


This is not a revision of Aristotle—it is his overcoming. Instancology honors the ambition of metaphysics, but sheds its ancient skin. It gives us a new language for what is ultimate, a new scaffold for understanding, and a new metaphysical grammar fit for a structured, dynamic, post-substantial world.



---


V. Conclusion: From the Last Stronghold to the First Portal


Aristotle's metaphysics was the last grand attempt to systematize being. Instancology is the first attempt to systematize instancing. The shift is subtle but seismic: from what is to how it appears, from stable substance to dynamic issuance, from fixed essence to relational structure.


This is not merely a philosophical correction. It is a civilizational pivot. The rebirth of metaphysics is not an academic project—it is a cultural necessity. Without a structured metaphysical core, all knowledge—science, ethics, art, politics—will continue to orbit in relativistic drift.


Instancology offers a new axis. A reborn metaphysics, not nostalgic, but necessary. A path not back to Aristotle’s stronghold, but forward through a new portal—where being, knowing, and issuing are reconciled into one structured vision of reality.



瀏覽(976) (0) 評論(0)
發表評論
我的名片
中國現代哲學家學會
註冊日期: 2015-01-10
訪問總量: 1,586,559 次
點擊查看我的個人資料
Calendar
最新發布
· 為什麼在西方的多數華人愛美元更
· On the Dual Nature of the Abso
· 論“悟性”與“理性”在中西哲學中的
· The AA IS and IS NOT
· Why AA Cannot Be Falsified
· Two armies
· 人為什麼思考人生的意義——絕對在
友好鏈接
· Rabbit:Stinger 的博客
· hare:hare的博客
· bunny2:bunny2的博客
· microsoftbug:microsoftbug的博
· InstanceTV:InstanceTV的博客
分類目錄
【Mingcheng】
【心言】
· Free book: The Ontology of Nat
· 同學會會長關於哲學研究的對話(2
· 同學會會長關於哲學研究的對話
· 天下大勢
· 愛者共天地
· 死亡萬歲 -- 清明節留下的一縷思
· 重發: 哲學之愛從何而來?
· [中哲會]新程序啟動說明
· 哲學之愛從何而來?
【電視直播】
· USA-China in Depth (1)
· 《中哲會》TV直播頻道
【政治】
· 毛澤東的“民族解放”神話:專制的
· 為什麼中國人反駁西方理論的觀點
· 台灣立足基礎-造原子彈
· 中國人缺乏理性會有什麼後果?
· 您願意選誰作為第一屆“網絡中華
· 中國未來的社會結構(2)
· 我建議在萬維上進行一次中國未來
· 川普現在唯一的願望是當個“前總
· 範例黨黨員章程
· 談中國民運的戰略與策略(範例黨
【傳統文化】
· 國學與西方思想的區別是狗尾與貂
· 必須立刻彈劾川普!
· 沒文化的鬼子
· 新年伊始中國“十馬奔騰”
· 扯住教皇不放—今天世界哪個國家
· 為什麼中國讀書人很難擺脫中國文
· 中國人的“感性邏輯”
· 也談“中國知識分子墮落”
· "現在打中國,輸贏無懸念&q
· 說!“你脫,還是不脫?!”
【深山蘭】
· 從二例看中國古代的思維方式
【其它】
· 語言與國家:俞興文明進步論的學
· 胡杰紀錄片:無人區畫展
· 美國為什麼偉大?- 只因為一個充
· 六四用一句話說
· 華人應該如何與西方人交往?(1)
· 中國人”也”是同歐洲人一樣的理性
· 萬維有太多哲學誤導!
· 一月二十號白宮會發生哪一幕?
· 中國問題:文字
· 用事實駁斥中共關於朝鮮戰爭的謊
【比較政策】
· 階級分化的復甦
【一般】
· 中國為什麼不適合搞民主?
· 伯克利新名言:贏了-就是不認輸
· 什麼是今日美國社會的根本問題?
· 美國人打輸了還是朋友,中國人..
· 川普—你為什麼如此愚蠢?!
· 壓垮川普的最後一根稻草-喬治亞
· 看來川普...
· 中國對中國人的影響
· 中國文化在哪些方面體現了幼稚?
· 對中國人“批判”的看法 - 兼答金
【遠方】
· 介紹一下荒誕論:遠方的孤獨
【何岸泉】
· 辯證法與放屁(ZT)
【哲學資料】
· 為相對主義辯護
· Instancology for Philosophers-
· Ten American Philosophers
· (1)馬克思和恩格思的“唯物主義”
· Phenomenology of Spirit, Chapt
· 德國政府決定:在全球範圍對使用
· 為什麼人需要哲學?
· ZT:Rights
· Is your pet psychic?
· Twin Telepathy: Is there a ‘Sp
【中軍】
· 關於精神的問題
· 思維創新的哲學理解(下)
· 思維創新的哲學理解(上)
· 人生究竟是什麼
· 悟性創新的本性及閃失
· 悟性的創新及孩子的例證
· 怎樣進行討論
· 文字、語音、語義與創新
· 哲學研究能幹點兒啥
· 中國缺少創新的各種看法
【徒子】
· 為什麼在西方的多數華人愛美元更
· On the Dual Nature of the Abso
· 論“悟性”與“理性”在中西哲學中的
· The AA IS and IS NOT
· Why AA Cannot Be Falsified
· Two armies
· 人為什麼思考人生的意義——絕對在
· Reason is Inside the Box, RW I
· WuXing Beyond Reason: Why Whol
· 為什麼範式哲學類似哥德爾定理和
【嘎子】
· 關於丘成桐的講話的評論
· 已經轉到嘎子博客
· <二> 原本打算單獨寫一篇
· 哲學同真理的關係以及辯證法的本
【几子】
· What Will Happen to President
· 隨想:可口可樂
· 分形與卦像:漫話混沌,科學,與
· 淺議科學實證主義
存檔目錄
2026-02-02 - 2026-02-24
2026-01-01 - 2026-01-30
2025-12-01 - 2025-12-31
2025-11-01 - 2025-11-30
2025-10-02 - 2025-10-31
2025-09-01 - 2025-09-29
2025-08-03 - 2025-08-28
2025-07-01 - 2025-07-29
2025-06-01 - 2025-06-26
2025-05-01 - 2025-05-30
2025-04-01 - 2025-04-30
2025-03-06 - 2025-03-31
2025-02-04 - 2025-02-17
2025-01-23 - 2025-01-23
2024-11-10 - 2024-11-10
2024-08-21 - 2024-08-21
2024-07-28 - 2024-07-28
2024-05-13 - 2024-05-15
2024-03-13 - 2024-03-18
2024-02-06 - 2024-02-06
2024-01-02 - 2024-01-31
2023-12-22 - 2023-12-31
2023-11-05 - 2023-11-19
2023-10-03 - 2023-10-29
2023-09-08 - 2023-09-25
2023-08-12 - 2023-08-20
2023-07-15 - 2023-07-15
2023-06-12 - 2023-06-12
2023-02-02 - 2023-02-27
2023-01-01 - 2023-01-24
2022-12-06 - 2022-12-31
2022-11-30 - 2022-11-30
2022-09-04 - 2022-09-25
2022-08-01 - 2022-08-22
2022-07-01 - 2022-07-21
2022-06-04 - 2022-06-27
2021-03-01 - 2021-03-26
2021-02-02 - 2021-02-26
2021-01-01 - 2021-01-31
2020-12-16 - 2020-12-26
2020-11-03 - 2020-11-27
2020-10-02 - 2020-10-31
2020-09-03 - 2020-09-21
2020-08-07 - 2020-08-26
2020-07-02 - 2020-07-24
2020-06-06 - 2020-06-08
2020-05-01 - 2020-05-12
2020-04-02 - 2020-04-27
2020-03-01 - 2020-03-31
2020-02-04 - 2020-02-25
2020-01-01 - 2020-01-31
2019-12-01 - 2019-12-29
2019-11-02 - 2019-11-17
2019-10-09 - 2019-10-14
2019-09-01 - 2019-09-08
2019-08-01 - 2019-08-24
2019-07-01 - 2019-07-27
2019-06-01 - 2019-06-30
2019-05-04 - 2019-05-29
2019-04-01 - 2019-04-30
2018-01-01 - 2018-01-02
2016-04-14 - 2016-04-20
2015-07-02 - 2015-07-24
2015-06-02 - 2015-06-28
2015-05-01 - 2015-05-31
2015-04-01 - 2015-04-29
2015-03-01 - 2015-03-26
2015-02-01 - 2015-02-28
2015-01-10 - 2015-01-31
 
關於本站 | 廣告服務 | 聯繫我們 | 招聘信息 | 網站導航 | 隱私保護
Copyright (C) 1998-2026. Creaders.NET. All Rights Reserved.