Self-Validating Empirical Epistemology?

[Pat Mustard]

Consider the proposition:

"The truthfulness of all propositions must be empirically validated to count as knowledge."

If the above proposition is known as true, then it must be (as a proposition) subject to empirical validation. <= Is that the case?

If it is the case, how was it empirically validated?

If it does not require empirical validation, AND it is known to be true, then there seems to be a proposition (that one) whose truthfulness is known without empirical validation.

If that is true, then the original proposition is false (because NOT all propositions are subject to empirical validation, only some)

What do we think?

Because it is an axiom, not an argument. The principle of empirical validation has been so successful for determining accuracy in so msny fields that the truth of the axion has been established beyond doubt.

And, as Ben pointed out already, the empirical evidence is its utility in every other field.