Metaphysics studies individual world-genesis where ontology studies universal structures

Evidence

But this immediately gives rise to a metaphysical interrogation. The upsurge of the for-itself starting from the in-itself is in no way comparable to the dialectical genesis of the Platonic Other starting from being. “Being” and “other” are, for Plato, genera. But we, on the contrary, have seen that being is an individual venture. Similarly the appearance of the for-itself is the absolute event which comes to being. There is therefore room here for a metaphysical problem which could be formulated thus: Why does the for-itself arise in terms of being? We, indeed, apply the term “metaphysical” to the study of individual processes which have given birth to this world as a concrete and particular totality. In this sense metaphysics is to ontology as history is to sociology. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1434

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sartre sharply distinguishes metaphysics (individual processes giving birth to the concrete world) from ontology (universal structures), via the history/sociology analogy.
• XREF: The metaphysics/ontology distinction maps onto the broader existentialist division between transcendental structures and concrete historical existence that Beauvoir’s ethics will extend. — connects to: Ontology is descriptive while metaphysics is hypothetical and concerns origins; Ontology specifies structures of being while metaphysics questions the existence of the existent — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 799; Metaphysics explains why this concrete world exists, as history explains particulars to sociology. (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Metaphysics explains why this concrete world exists, as history explains particulars to sociology. #expands (0.85)
• Metaphysics is any assertion of extra-historical abstract universal truth. #qualifies (0.80) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1553