The reductio only lands if mathematical practice has normative authority over metaphysical positions, but Quine's own revisability thesis holds that no statement is immune from revision on theoretical grounds.

?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.

Metaphysical positions(as philosophical claims about what is real): Beliefs or theories about the fundamental nature of reality—what actually exists and how it's structured.
Quine(as a proper name referring to the philosopher whose theory is being discussed): Willard Van Orman Quine was a 20th-century American philosopher who wrote about how we know things and how language works. In this statement, we're discussing one of his specific ideas about observation.
Revisability thesis(as Quine's specific philosophical theory): Quine's idea that any belief we hold—even ones that seem absolutely certain—could potentially be changed if we had good enough reasons to do so.
normative authority(whether something has the right to guide how we understand things): The legitimate power or right to tell us what we should think, believe, or do.

Based on where you are in your exploration