Physicalism is very interesting and brings up many worthy points of discussion even though its precepts appear as limiting the interpretations of human experience. Ontological investigation cannot be taken too seriously as ideas of being and existence seem much too complex to be expressed in words, although I will attempt to do such a task in relating my understanding of the philosophy of physicalism and how it relates to ontological classification methods and the more practical usages of knowledge. Physicalism attempts to materialize the universe in a quest to make sense of it. In order for physicalism to be plausible a direct and irrefutable relationship establishing cause most stem from the physical nature of objects. Physicalism must ignore the subjective qualities in order for it to assume authority. Physicalism does not take into consideration of exchange and process rather, it rests on the idea that material and the physical world is the ultimate ending to any process or idea.

The idea of ultimate meaning being placed into such a confining concept such as matter evokes a gloomy outlook for life and ignores what happiness life's pursuits can sometimes bring with the absence of physical recognition. Materialistic impulses throughout the last 200 years or so may have influenced this brand of thinking where all meaning is contained within the physical machinations physically represented as the sensory universe or, at least reflect some of its truer essence. Understanding these current forces which convince humans to act in material fashions resonate with the...

Besides this brand of philosophy's questionable artistic merit, it often fails in other ways as well. The logic on relying on effects and not consequences seems to be faltering in its essential argument as too much emphasis is placed on a possibly unbalanced level of demarcation.
Physical science has found no unified theory of the universe because of the very nature of science to separate and fragment its contents. Science is not about gathering ideas, it is about polarizing them. It is like listening to the echo of a sound and recognizing it as source. Phenomena, transcending the physical universe, goes generally unexplained as mysterious happenings hint that there is something beyond what we can sense.

Quantum physics and other of the more philosophical sides of current academic pursuits rooted in physical science seem to drift away from the idea of matter being any source of cause in the universe and absurdity begins to reign. Philosopher Thomas Nagel's philosophy rests in accepting the absurd or at least understanding it, or, the awareness of the lack of the ability to understand it. I think that Nagel would not accept physicalism due to its ignorance of the absurd. The physical is not absurd, it is sensible. It can be grasped but only in context to something that cannot.

Nagel would reject physicalism due to its similarities of evolution. Nagel is a critic of Darwinism…