If scientific history shows foundational principles (e.g., Euclidean geometry, absolute simultaneity) being overturned through reasoning, they were never truly non-demonstrative bedrock.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Absolute simultaneity(Lorentz's view versus Einstein's view): The idea that there is one universal, objective way to say whether two events happen at the same time, no matter who is observing them.
Euclidean geometry(as the standard geometric system for comparison): The familiar geometry taught in most schools, based on flat surfaces where parallel lines never meet and the angles in a triangle always add up to 180 degrees.
Foundational principles(as principles that logical empiricists wanted to protect): Basic, fundamental beliefs or rules that serve as the starting point for a system of thinking—the bedrock that other ideas are built on.
Non-demonstrative bedrock(as the type of foundational principle the statement questions): A basic assumption or starting point that cannot be proven true through reasoning or evidence, but is simply accepted as true without proof.

Based on where you are in your exploration