An Essay about Atheism in Latin

[FlatAssembler]

And even that science is the only way of knowing doesn't need to be a metaphysical conviction, we can come to that notion empirically

Here is the standard question about empirical knowing, as typed out by another poster on this forum a while back:

"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)

Fine, such questions probably can't be answered using strictly the scientific method. But that doesn't mean we can't make a strong case for what is the correct answer to that via induction. And we can perhaps say induction is the first part of the scientific method: hypotheses that are tested need to be reasonable, they need not to appear to contradict our experience.