logical positivism is self-refuting

I wouldn't say that logical positivism is an axiom (a premise so evident as to be accepted as true without controversy).

And, TorpidPhil- everything can be self refuting any time it allows itself to be or gains the negative impression from others of being.

Something described as an egg cup might instead have been originally designed to be a drinking vessel.

Just because someone labels something or someone according to a chosen function that they have displayed themselves to be able to do, doesn't mean that is the ideal thing for that thing to be- either in its own opinion or 'objectively'.

It is the callous nature of how the universe operates that, what I see as a wise venerable man, some others might write off as being a 'doddery old codger'. And no matter how much I might protect my own- and hopefully his own - definition of him, it might still evaporate on exposure to the harsh light of 'reality'- where reality is a consensus of the majority as to what they choose to respect on an 'everyday' basis (what is natural to their own personality) as opposed to merely on a 'ceremonial' basis (out of duty that might be alien to them).

I hear this claim frequently, for those of you who are familiar with the movement do you share my hatred of this claim? Quite clearly logical positivism is an axiom! It's a starting point for reason ergo doesn't have to be proven... -.-