It struck me recently that readers of this blog may not realize why I call it Physician to Meta–Physician in the first place.
What is metaphysics? What is the difference between a metaphysician and a meta-physician?
Although I tried to explain these terms in my book and in an early blog posting (December 16, 2006) I believe that an explanation is in order.
In brief the term metaphysics is a branch of philosophy whose origins are from Aristotle. His writings on the nature of reality, of spirit, of the soul and the like were discovered after his death after (meta) his works on the physical (physica) world. Ergo–metaphysics.
Traditional concepts of metaphysics involved strictly intellectual arguments for or against the existence of God, the soul, the nature of morality, of knowledge and ultimate meaning. It was not considered to be empirical or based on scientific observations.
Over the centuries, however, the insights of science and psychology as well as other fields have broadened the concept.
As I see it, any field which touches on the nature of ultimate reality has metaphysical implications. So not only science but religion, spirituality even the arts reflect the human desire to seek wisdom and understanding.
Now there is a less academic and more popular connotation of metaphysics as well–New Age, mystical, paranormal, occult, mediumship practices and writings are lumped together under this topic.
A seeker of wisdom, as I see it, whether formally schooled or just curious about the nature of reality is a metaphysician as I see it.
A meta–physician is merely a similarly afflicted physician and as such I have attempted to bring my deep desire to understand the universe and the human beings who inhabit it to the practice of medicine.
It has been and will, I'm sure, continue to be a great challenge. But it is one I enjoy pursuing.