I agree. I'm not sure if it's a fair representation of Margaret Maconald's view or not, but it's definitely inadequate. Philosophy has always been considered a

I agree. I'm not sure if it's a fair representation of Margaret Maconald's view or not, but it's definitely inadequate. Philosophy has always been considered a "science" in the old sense of a discipline that allows you to actually know something. If it doesn't do that, then you might as well just turn to poetry and literature, because philosophy won't offer anything new. However I think it is worth recognizing that what the modern scientific form of verification is pretty new (falsifiability requirements, data sets, hypothesis, experiments, and so on), and doesn't have a monopoly. It's just so commonly accepted nowadays that it feels that way. But there are other methods of verification that work well in philosophy: consistency, finding agreement from other reasonable people, clarity, etc.