> The radical skeptic's argument that it's not, in fact, possible to mathematically prove statements in any meaningful sense is as always both perfectly irrefut

> The radical skeptic's argument that it's not, in fact, possible to mathematically prove statements in any meaningful sense is as always both perfectly irrefutable and perfectly uninteresting. Interesting to me is whether this "the" "radical skeptic" you're mocking is as it seems to be. I'd say it has the odor of a very convenient rhetorical strawman. When practicing logic, don't forget the importance of ontology, as one could learn from epistemology. But then, that's a lot of work, and that sort of thinking "is" "pedantic". Welcome to Planet Earth, circa 2023, {the culture you live in}, please enjoy your stay.