"Metaphysician" pulls unfalsifiable system out of his ass...

>bruh what if *hits joint* we aRe oN a mATriX bruuuuh *cough* *cough*

Is there antything more useless than this?

does anyone on reddit even know what materialism means? there is materialist metaphysics, that's not an oxymoron

Falsifiability is a meta-criteria that subordinates the empirical to itself. Its metaphysics lmao. Not only epistemological but you're saying we Ought to use it? So its a moral claim too

the value of unfalsifiability is itself unfalsifiable

Imagine still being a logical positivist in 2k19

Non idealists gtfo out of Yea Forums

The code monkey is a truly sad creature to behold. Lacking in all conceivable virtues and abilities, he could only resort to being "smart", an adjective reserved for those dull children too inept to shine at the top and too boring to dance at the bottom. Basing his entire value on his intelligence but lacking it entirely, you will find him arrogantly spouting half-witted amalgamations of misunderstood wisdom and pathetically parodying logic and rhetoric, slinking away utterly at the first sign of a capable mind ready to point out the all too obvious holes in his thoughts. Still, one ought to feel for the code monkey. He will spend most of his life on a completely meaningless thoughtless trade filled with people just like him, hopeless and virginal. Then he will be laid off, and, finding himself face to face with his worthlessness, promptly end his own life. The improvement of the gene pool would be welcome, but we mustn't wholly ignore the tragedy hidden beneath.

>implying all metaphysical systems are reasonable.

based. I say this as a borderline code slave.

>Rent free
Did a programmer fuck your oneitis or something? OP never mentioned coding or anything related to it.

Listen you retard falsification is absolute garbage you're better off with apodictic certainties or even the scientific method as a baseline at least then you can escape the relevant semantic criteria for scientific status. Falsification lets you pick and choose whatever false assertions you want insofar as you are prepared to indicate some observation, however improbable, which (if it were to come to pass) would cause you to change your mind.

>muh high degree of testability

Still bullshit. It's not possible to compare the degrees of testability of two distinct theories EXCEPT when one entails the other. Testability is a completely semantic notion with zero bearing on retrospective judgment or evidential support, all they can say for their falsificational status is for any kind of ill-founded claim that happens to be easy to test.

>lots of butthurt
>no actual arguments

How can metaphysics ever recover?

Astolfo porn is p cool

Attached: 3.png (980x1422, 560K)

There's nothing to argue against, you said it was unfalsifiable according to worthless assertions about nature and proceeded to "argue" that metaphysics is bs

Come up with a reason why falsifiability is the proper method for ascertaining truth without relying on metaphysical arguments to explain why.

"Reasonable" and "falsifiable" are both ad-homs in this context. Reasonable is only your opinion. Fallibility has no proven bearing on truth-value. By your own criteria, your take is bs.

If you read philosophy and not just pop-sci, you'd know that.

Attached: sad_bertrand.jpg (426x569, 34K)

>criterion of falsifiability

Attached: TpIluCr.gif (500x620, 524K)

wish I had a cute, antimetaphysical twink to cuddle

Anus isn't designed for sperm and sperm not for anus.

Attached: dfa.jpg (1424x1480, 469K)

This applies to all of philosophy, not just metaphysics.

you're correct that the majority of people in the industry are like this, but
> completely meaningless thoughtless trade
is inaccurate. Programming is the most abstract form of engineering and has some fascinating theory backing it up. although, if you're the type of person who makes these generalisations then you're probably too unmotivated to explore that theory.

you're not a programmer - you are a user of software. you're mathematically inept and creatively bankrupt, but you're not the only one. people like you are the reason that the general respect for programmers is at an all time low, with the quality of programs dropping quicker by the minute.
maybe read some good books on programming theory. if you have even the semblance of a mathematical mind you might come away with a vague understanding of how deep computational theory goes.
... but you won't do that because you're likely a lazy bugman. you know what, please just quit your "code slave" job and go into the trades. you'll be happier and so will your replacement, who might just be one of those few programmers who're actually good at programming.

> huh huh huh triggered programmer
i'm not a programmer, solely because the field is infested by people like you.

Imagine being such a nerd that you get mad about someone not knowing enough about programming.

i'm not mad about someone not knowing enough about programming. i'm mad about someone espousing a derogatory point of view on a field that they're either incapable of learning or too lazy to explore.

>designed