Can only empirically verified claims be true?

Some skeptics assert that we should only base our beliefs on, "something that can be proven by true knowledge". But the problem with that statement, "you should only believe something that can be proven by true knowledge" can't be proven as true knowledge. The whole thing is self-defeating.

This is called verificationism, Which are statements that can only be empirically verifiable, Or truths of logic. Interestingly, Verificationism, Is a non-empirically verifiable proposition. It fails to meet its own standard because it is in fact, An example of the very thing it was designed to guard against (metaphysical).

The verification principle says, "a factual statement is meaningful if it can be empirically (indirectly or directly) verified by empirical observations". But there are no observations we can make that would verify it so either the principle is meaningless or it is an arbitrary assumption. The verification principle does not self-verify itself, If a skeptic claims it does, Then he/she needs to justify/validate that claim.

Another example, "it's true by definition, Or you can prove it with one of your five sense. " The problem with that statement is that it isn't true by definition nor can you prove it with one of your five senses. Therefore, It is a self-defeating philosophy.

Let's have a discussion!

I accept your challenge, And will be arguing that the only claims that can be considered true are those that have been proven so (the definition of an empirically verified claim). The burden of proof will fall to both sides, And all sources must be cited. All the rules of the terms of service will apply. I look forward to the debate, And wish you good luck.

F

The verification principle says a statement only has meaning (one would have to show that "meaning" is not arbitrary) only if it is validated by observable conditions to determine its truth or falseness. A metaphysical statement (unobservant or unable to empirically verify a verbal statement) cannot be empirically verified. Its merely assumed (rationally and sometimes logically, Depending on the motives of the individual). Claiming that only empirically verified claims should be believed as "true" is a self-defeating position because that very statement is a non-empirically verifiable proposition.

Sources: https://www. Philosophybasics. Com/branch_verificationism. Html and https://www. Britannica. Com/topic/verifiability-principle

I can't post my argument here, So I'll send a link to it:

https:// docs. Google. Com/ document/ d/ 1oy9aIY4lEYB188FH30OCpDM8S3sAYTOZuxZ5z-U55CA /edit