Analytic metaphysics is usually considered a contemporary form of traditional, pre-
Cartesian metaphysics. This paper examines the epistemic legitimacy of analytic
metaphysics in the face of scientific dominance. While naturalized metaphysics has found
its place within science, analytic metaphysics remains challenged. To meet the challenge, I
propose interpreting analytic metaphysics as a form of logical inquiry, positioning logic as
its foundation, similarly to how science grounds naturalized metaphysics. The argument is
developed through three key points: (1) tracing the historical connection between science
and naturalized metaphysics on the one hand, and analytic metaphysics and philosophical
logic on the other hand, (2) highlighting similarities between logic and metaphysics, and (3)
demonstrating that contemporary analytic metaphysics often operates as a logical inquiry.
I show that this strategy preserves classical options at the meta-metaphysical level, arguing
that a view of logic as grounded in language is in a better position to safeguard the autonomy
from science and the collapse into naturalized metaphysics.
