Having selected a topic like
Metaphysics, I first wish to mention that I neither is believer nor a non-believer. What does
that exactly mean? Accepting the existance of God or not may sound a bit confusing. My statement above by which I stand firmly and narrate the reason.
Since God is not seen by any one of us, how can this be believed? At the same time when I think of this universe, its components, its vastness, Its mystery etc., etc. then my queries about it lost the hope of having a satisfactory reply. This in turn direct my thoughts towards a power that is the supreme.
Things happen in nature and we simply accept it.
Scientists explain or try to expalin almost everything in terms of science. Yet there are quite a few instances which are still left unanswered. Why? Numerous reasons are cited for this inadequacy but the scientists too are inclined towards the term
Metaphysics at one time or another.
'Seeing is believing' if the adage is true, then the existence of God can be out right rejected. The matter is not that simple. So the faith of one cannot be summarised in any better way than simply his faith. Can we snatch one's faith however silly it looks like! We should leave one's faith to the personitself rather than interfere in it.
The term 'metaphysics' instantly attracts me in a way that probably makes me feel a bit uncetain about my true feelings. Through imagination something can be written on 'Metaphysics' but ultimately it is the people who will either accept or reject it.
Great philosopher Aristotle explained that science is truth, so are metaphysics. The process of evolution of mankind is yet to be determined and there is no hard evidence about it found so far. So in automatic conclusion it is better to have a unanimous choice than to live in a fool's paradise.
Documented proofs often reveal the real reason of a incident but after proper argument, the ultimate winner is the neutral group.
Subir Sengupta