The Resurrection

[Angrboda]

and this one:


It's similar with materialism. Materialists begin with the idea that only the material is real, so a materialist experiment which only accepts materialist methods and materialist results as reliable will rule out non-materialist answers a priori. 

I think you misunderstand both empiricism and materialism because of your background in philosophy.  I see it as a case of Maslow's hammer, though I may be mistaken.

Empiricism and materialism are proven by getting reliable results.  Neither have to prove themselves metaphysically to philosophers, that being the case.  That's why both are considered knowledge.  In contrast, other methods (religion, inspiration, intuition, philosophy, or whatever) do not yield reliable results.  That's why they don't qualify as knowledge anymore.

So what empiricists and materialists actually claim is that only their methods are reliable, by our experiences with those methods and with others.  There is no reason to exclude other methods up front, but they are abandoned along the way when they are shown to be unreliable (as the histories of scholarship and science have shown).

However, you are correct that there is no reason to continue this digression.

So empiricism is confirmed using the methods of empiricism which demonstrates that empiricism is sound if empiricism is sound.

Circular logic much, bro?