I don't believe the tag is a good one for this site. Firstly, such questions generally are more philosophy based, and thus don't really belong here, so having this tag seems to encourage off topic questions. Second, the only question that bears this tag is not really much better categorized with it, at least for quantum computing experts. Finally, I believe this tag could very well drive off experts. Thoughts?


These are the top definitions I come up with when I google "metaphysics+definition":

  • the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, identity, time, and space.

  • abstract theory with no basis in reality

So yes, I don't think that tag should exist. As a rule of thumb, avoid creating tags which, if used as a stand-alone tag on a question, would probably make the question unsuitable for this site. To solidify it for this case "pure" questions aren't suitable for this site. We are a technical site and should avoid opinion-based philosophy discussions, which questions about meta-physics would likely bring about. Also, I can already imagine the large possibility of misuse of that tag, by newcomers to the site.

Update: I've removed the tag from this question. That was the only question which was using it. If someone has any objection to this and/or a strong reason as to why the tag should be kept, feel free to let me know in the comments.

  • $\begingroup$ Hmm, I think I added that tag (what a surprise!). Perhaps indeed this is too vague. However, that question is 1) decent and 2) falls squarely into philosophy! I will suggest to add a philosophy tag, then. $\endgroup$ – Discrete lizard Mar 26 '18 at 7:23
  • $\begingroup$ I do think we shouldn't ignore the philosophical consequences of Quantum Computing. As long as it is a philosophy of math or physics (e.g. meta-physics), I think it is fine. $\endgroup$ – Discrete lizard Mar 26 '18 at 7:24
  • $\begingroup$ @Discretelizard A 'philosophy' tag would still fall under the category of "used as a stand-alone tag on a question, would probably make the question unsuitable for this site" $\endgroup$ – Mithrandir24601 Mar 26 '18 at 7:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Mithrandir24601 If that is what you think, I won't create it. (I mean, this only happens if my edit is accepted, feel free to revert) However, I do think someone will, in the future. $\endgroup$ – Discrete lizard Mar 26 '18 at 7:54
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Discretelizard Personally, I'm a bit on the fence - I don't have a problem with the tag you're trying to create - if we allow history of QC questions, we should allow 'philosophy of QC'. Only, I'm not so sure about the name. I suppose, in other tags, having the 'quantum' is implied a lot... $\endgroup$ – Mithrandir24601 Mar 26 '18 at 8:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Mithrandir24601 In that case, we should simply wait and see if someone creates the tag for us. $\endgroup$ – Discrete lizard Mar 26 '18 at 8:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .