I have stumbled over something written by a Professor Rudolf Carnap in the 30s. He writes that “metaphysical propositions are neither true nor false, but expressive.” That is, they are like lyric poems. They “pretend” to be representative, to have theoretical value, and on this count deceive the reader, and the metaphysician himself. The metaphysician believes that his metaphysical treatise has asserted something, and he is led by this into argument and polemics against the propositions of some other metaphysician.
A poet, however, does not assert that the verses of another are wrong or erroneous, but that they are either good or bad.
Reminds me of my question about the Auschwitz gas chambers in which metaphysicians from every walk of life claim that maybe a million Jews were murdered. My question, “Please provide me with the name of one person, with proof . . . .” does not assert that a million or so Jews were not killed in those machines. I am not arguing that the claims made by gas-chamber metaphysicians are wrong or erroneous, I cannot demonstrate that to be true, but that their arguments are “bad.” If their arguments were good, they would try to answer my question. But in truth they are the most commonplace of lyricists, repeating their canned verses without end, understanding perfectly well that the great mass of our compatriots listen to their bad poesy and accept it much like they listen to and accept the comedy of "I Love Raymond."