All of their qualitative properties are the same (e.g. white, rectangular, 9 x 11 inches...) and thus, the argument claims, bundle theory and metaphysical realism cannot both be correct.

Despite being at one time a defender of metaphysical realism, Hilary Putnam later abandoned this view in favor of a position he termed "internal realism".

I then go on to discuss the idea of "independence of thought" and show why a metaphysical, as distinct from a "critical", realism cannot be coherently defended.

Putnam has clarified that his real target in this argument was never skepticism, but metaphysical realism.

The problem with metaphysical realism, according to Putnam, was that it fails to explain the possibility of reference and truth.

The theory also seemed, in Popper's eyes, to support metaphysical realism and the regulative idea of a search for truth.

Marked by a post-minimalist background and a poetic intensity, his art has been referred to as metaphysical realism.

It assumes a metaphysical realism, in which there is an external reality independent of the knower.

Nor does he accept - the further conclusion that sometimes follows this - that Kant's epistemology precludes metaphysical realism, i.e. necessitates anti-realism, in ethics and theology.

Tragedy - construed as an ethical construct - plays an important part in the awareness of metaphysical realism.