Yes, I fancy a turn at speculative philosophy. There's only one drawback: I have a problem with belief. Maybe the truth is not beautiful, or simple. (Cf. the motto from Part II of Naive Metaphysics: ''All truth is simple.' Is that not a compound lie?' Nietzsche.) Beauty does not always inspire confidence. The alleged 'elegance' of a metaphysical theory can also be a deceptive siren call tempting us to abandon reason and logic. I prefer imperfection, a few rough edges. The signs of work in progress.
The very notion of 'belief', as something you 'hold to', is fatally tainted with religion. Bradley a philosopher for whom I otherwise have great respect remarks in the Introduction to his Appearance and Reality that metaphysics is 'a principal way of... experiencing the Deity. No one, probably, who has not felt this, however differently he might describe it, has ever cared much for metaphysics.' How then can he claim in the Preface that his book 'is meant to be a critical discussion of first principles, and its object is to stimulate inquiry and doubt'? Wearing your religion on your sleeve is hardly an auspicious way to start.
Of course, I forgot. Doubt applies to everything else except God. You temper and strengthen your belief in the fires of doubt. Yet the fact remains that all the great works of metaphysics from Plato up to Whitehead have either sought to prove God's existence, or at the very least (in the case of Kant) to 'limit the claims of reason to make room for faith'.
I said I wasn't going to talk about myself, but this depresses me. Are we going to let the God party continue their two and a half millennia old monopoly on metaphysical inquiry? No, we are not. The thing itself, whatever it is, has nothing to do with religion. I know this, just as well as anyone knows what they are looking for (remember Meno's Paradox). I am looking for reality. The only assumption required is that somewhere along this seemingly endless hall of mirrors, there is something real.