Why Switch from Metaphysics to a Practise of Pataphysics

Why might a philosopher these days switch from tradition old-style "representation theory" or "metaphysics" to a practise of "pataphysics" instead, and how might "pataphysics" be helpful for the "aesthetic re-enchantment" of life?

There are several questions this essay sets out to answer. These are; is a life of metaphysical belief likely to lead one to a life of happiness; is a life of pataphysical story making, likely to lead to a life of happiness; and what does a life of happiness mean?

I'm going to start with the last question first. A life of happiness is usually taken to mean, fulfilment in the areas that give you pleasure and an absence of pain, emotional, physical or mental, but the real issue with happiness is that all philosophers have a different idea as to what actually constitutes happiness, like all people, they want to define their happiness around the beliefs that they have. This has resulted in some of history's most confusing beliefs, for example:

"There is but one Almighty God, who is good, and great and wonderful, and yeah he does a lot of bad stuff, causes a lot pain, but there will be a reason for it, just not sure what it is right now".

This idea, which is the backbone of the Christian faith, has caused many a heated discussion, because of the anomaly that it is. Hopefully the ideas that are presented below will be absent of such confusion, and will result in a more practical view of happiness.

Metaphysics raises questions regarding existence; what it is, what forms it takes, what is the difference between matter and mind? During the process of attempting to answer these questions, a lot of inconsistencies appear in the theories that are formed. For example, if a matter Ð''object' is given its characteristics by the way a person observes it, then surely all things only exist in particulars, as Locke said, but if this is the case, why do we, as humans, insist on describing Ð''objects' in general terms. Using the idea of a Ð''Table' here for the analogy, we have labelled a four-legged object, which has a flat surface on top, a Table, however we have designed tables that do not fit this profile. The three legged table for example, and apart from our lack of consistency when it comes to making objects, different people will perceive the same table differently. A tall person will see differences with the table, will value it differently, may have different uses for it, may even have no use for it, when compared to a shorter person's opinion of the table, yet we persist on calling it a Ð''Table', with total indifference to the different forms it takes. It is because of this habit we have for labelling, that assumptions are made.

Back to the table, from my position I can see only three legs, I make the assumption that it has a fourth one using my ability to reason, and so as not to raise the question regarding how it is supported, or even worst, having to consider re-labelling this Ð''table' altogether, just because I cannot see the fourth leg. Metaphysics is full of these kinds of assumptions. The end result is that metaphysics' believes in a concept called dualism, two separate entities existing independently of each other. That is why a Ð''Table' is still a Ð''Table' even though people perceive it differently. Matter is independent of mind, but there is no actual proof for the fact that a Ð''Table' is still a Ð''Table' when it is not being perceived. As you will be able to see, any attempt to substantiate this claim of independence is impossible, for the simple reason to prove it, one has to perceive it, which invalidates any evidence collected.

Metaphysics' way of dealing with this major unprovable theory is to assume; assume you know the truth; assume the sun rises each day; assume you have knowledge, while in fact you do not. So with metaphysics you assume you are happy, and in doing this you deceive yourself, you become attached to your assumed happiness, because you believe it is good. The problem with assumptions is you can always make another assumption to either prove, or disprove the previous assumption, meaning ones happiness hangs from a very thin line.

Now pataphysics is an extension of metaphysics, but with solutions to the problems of assumptions and attachment, which were found above. The basic idea with pataphysics is, you imagine your solution. This will sound quite odd unless a detailed explanation is given.

With the above conclusion that there is no truth or knowledge, because nothing is provable, it raises the question of, what is reality then; is there one definitive reality? This is where pataphysics comes in with an answer, every person and every object, that can perceive,