Why Switch from Metaphysics to a Practise of Pataphysics

Why might a philosopher these days switch from tradition old-style "representation theory" or "metaphysics" to a practise of "pataphysics" instead, and how might "pataphysics" be helpful for the "aesthetic re-enchantment" of life?

There are several questions this essay sets out to answer. These are; is a life of metaphysical belief likely to lead one to a life of happiness; is a life of pataphysical story making, likely to lead to a life of happiness; and what does a life of happiness mean?

I'm going to start with the last question first. A life of happiness is usually taken to mean, fulfilment in the areas that give you pleasure and an absence of pain, emotional, physical or mental, but the real issue with happiness is that all philosophers have a different idea as to what actually constitutes happiness, like all people, they want to define their happiness around the beliefs that they have. This has resulted in some of history's most confusing beliefs, for example:

"There is but one Almighty God, who