You could charitably understand everything that such people (who assert that metaphysics is BS) say with a silent “up to empirical equivalence”. Doesn’t the problem disappear then?
No because you need a theory of metaphysics to explain what “empirical equivalence” means.
To be honest, I don’t see that at all.
So how would you define “empirical equivalence”?
You could charitably understand everything that such people (who assert that metaphysics is BS) say with a silent “up to empirical equivalence”. Doesn’t the problem disappear then?
No because you need a theory of metaphysics to explain what “empirical equivalence” means.
To be honest, I don’t see that at all.
So how would you define “empirical equivalence”?