In short "empiricism" is an aspect describing one aspect of the cognition of languaging individuals in consensual domains. No observers, no facts, no agreed measurements, no empiricism. Those who doubt counter intuitive ideas such as this are invited to consider the nature of "empirical data" in world where say we we all color blind or deaf.
my answer would be negative largely on the basis of Maturana's work
is "miraculously decoupled from the physical world by its progenitors [...] (and thus) grounded on a solipsistic foundation that flies in the face of both common sense and scientific knowledge".
Critics have argued that the term fails to define or explain living systems and that, because of the extreme language of self-referentiality it uses without any external reference, it is really an attempt to give substantiation to Maturana's radical constructivist or solipsistic epistemology, or what Danilo Zolo has called instead a "desolate theology".
In short "empiricism" is one concept describing an aspect of the cognition of languaging individuals in consensual domains. No observers, no facts, no agreed measurements, no empiricism.
Am I reading this the way it's intended. Are you, or Maturana, claiming that there are "No observers, no facts, no agreed measurements, no empiricism.?"
This condition would only skew what ever data...
This issue seems to have arisen elsewhere
Sorry Argome but this is a philosophy thread which assumes familiarity with some basic ideas like "the questioning of common sense". Terms like languaging can readily be researched on Google. Try it and come back if you have a problem.
"When one puts objectivity in parenthesis, all views, all verses in the multiverse are equally valid. Understanding this, you lose the passion for changing the other. One of the results is that you look apathetic to people. Now, those who do not live with objectivity in parentheses have a passion for changing the other. So they have this passion and you do not. For example, at the university where I work, people may say, ‘Humberto is not really interested in anything,’ because I don’t have the passion in the same sense that the person that has objectivity without parentheses. And I think that this is the main difficulty. To other people you may seem too tolerant. However, if the others also put objectivity in parentheses , you discover that disagreements can only be solved by entering a domain of co-inspiration, in which things are done together because the participants want to do them. With objectivity in parentheses, it is easy to do things together because one is not denying the other in the process of doing them."
Humberto Maturana - Interview 1985.
Knowledge is not depend upon democratic consensus. Believing Earth is flat by millions doesn't make it so. Believing that if I jump off the Empire State Building and if I got others to believe I would survive doesn't make it true. Reality is independent of human thought and no amount of sophistic verbiage is going to ever change that.
...a debunking of "observer independent reality".
It is obviously not "a reality" for birds.
Who the hell knows, or cares, what "reality" is to a bird?