> requires you to observe the efficacy of all methods of expanding human knowledge I should have hedged with "all known methods". It's possible that someone m

> requires you to observe the efficacy of all methods of expanding human knowledge I should have hedged with "all known methods". It's possible that someone might invent a more effective method (but I believe there is actually good reason to believe that this is not possible, but that's a tangent). > preference utilitarianism sets the stage for social choice theory, in which theorems tell us about the properties and weaknesses of systems for groups of agents to collectively make choices (Arrow's theorem, Harsanyi's theorem etc). Sure. So? Arrow's theorem is a great example. It's a theorem. It's math. It's not what is generally done under the rubric of "philosophy". > this does not mean that true properties of addition are "empirical" truths proceeding from science Yes it does. What is the "true" value of (say) 11 + 27? It could be 38, but it could also be 1 (mod 12) or 13 (mod 24) any of which might be the "true" value depending on the application.