Free will and the necessary evil

[Jehanne]

Merriam-Webster -- Metaphysics

That's nice. That still doesn't help you. Try actually supporting your idea instead of arguing based upon etymological nonsense. Even if metaphysics were "beyond physics" -- whatever that means -- it doesn't show that doing one is a prerequisite to doing the other.

Metaphysical ideas are not testable, which means that they will never rise beyond the level of conjecture. I could claim the Cosmos is eternal and uncaused, pointing to peer-reviewed papers in The Physical Review Letters to support that POV, while others will appeal to "God did it". The former claim can be modeled, and, perhaps, even tested; the latter claim, even if true, is not testable barring God's participation in some controlled and observable experiment (say, a randomized, double-blinded prayer study or the spontaneous healing of an adult amputee or something similar). And, so, metaphysicians disagree with one another, some atheistic and others theistic with still others deistic and pantheistic and no mechanisms exist to adjudicate the disagreements amongst them.