"[Aristotle] claims that each science studies a unified genus, but denies that there is a single genus for all beings". You're applying tautology without really understanding the construction of your own question.
The study of being qua being; or science qua science; or
mathematics qua mathematics; or X qua X for any X.
Metaphysics.
Or as it is commonly referred to in computer science: function self-application. One example of which being the Y combinator (as in the name of this very forum).
I am applying a tautology in exactly the mathematical sense of a tautology; and I understand my construction just fine.
Had you been more charitable you would’ve addressed my argument; not your strawman of my argument.
I'm charitable by trying to teach you with examples.
> Or as it is commonly referred to in computer science: function self-application
No, that's recursion, not metaphysics.
Is computer science the same as programming, no. Computer science is the study of programming, not programming. You learn this in your first year of CS.
If you're smart enough to _really_ understand what a Y combinator is, this should be a piece of cake.
I am struggling to spot the charity in all your condescension.
metaphysics
/ˌmɛtəˈfɪzɪks/
noun
the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, identity, time, and space.
First principles? Like logical/mathematical axioms? Sprinkle abstraction. Identity? f(x) = x ?
Time? Space? Spacetime? Minkowsky space?
On a fuzzy-match that sounds ludicrously similar to the sort of stuff the formal sciences concern themselves with. Almost as if the distinction between science and philosophy is non-existence given the demarcation problem.
What makes this assertion? The literal definition of the term.
Are you the kid who thinks he's edgy by saying in philosophy class: "It depends on the meaning of the word 'X'" every time someone tries to explain X to you?
So if the science of science is not science - is that not a contradiction?