What is human nature--is there such a thing?

[aperson]

Originally Posted by perkeyone

besides the definition of empirical knowledge makes it pretty clear that it is the only valid type.

I think you don't understand what I'm saying.

Besides, I could say that there exists some reasoning schema, let's call it S1, that defines itself as such: If aperson says some statement s is true, then s is true; this reasoning schema is the only valid reasoning schema.

S1 satisfies the same conditions of validity as 'empirical knowledge' and we certainly know that S1 isn't valid.

Also, I'm not talking in circles; I'm saying that observation is still limited by our perception. There is no way to justify anything we evaluate inside our perception because we can't justify our perception in some stronger system. Math, science, and empirical fields are all based on completely arbitrary axioms that are meant to mimic the real world, but we can't say that they themselves are objectively descriptive.