Talk:Common-sense metaphysics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (core areas): Metaphysics

[edit] Some needed clarifications

I don't mean to be rude, but this article seems like an argument for or about metaphysics that purports to stem from findings in psychology. The second sentence of this article, "Developmental Psychology studies the stages in which metaphysical lessons are learned," seems to stem from a serious confusion that persists throughout the article. At least, the above-quoted statement stands in need of serious support from outside sources. In general, it needs to be clarified how infant behavior shows that infants make "metaphysical" inferences, rather than just inferences; assuming that clarification is even possible, it should then be clarified who (which notable philosophers or psychologists) actually interprets experimental results as indicating that infants hold the metaphysical positions they are saddled with in this article. Threepenpals (talk) 01:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I decided to check out the citations on this page, and failed to see how they supported the relevant sentences in this article. The first citation does not mention infant development, and only briefly discusses the folk-theories of older children; yet, this citation is being used in this wiki article to justify strong claims about the 'metaphysical views' of infants.

The second citation contains, nearly word for word, this wiki article.

The third citation seems primarily concerned with arguing for the following claim: "The nature of human nature has not been lost on Islam. Islam recognizes human nature, but it turns it onto the human in many very fundamental ways to produce that uniquely blighted human: the Muslim," (http://www.6thcolumnagainstjihad.com/GMASON_P9.htm). I don't want to push a POV, but it seems ridiculous to link to these sorts of articles.

I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, but it seems like the above issues need to be addressed. Threepenpals (talk) 02:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)