It is not totally clear what you mean by this, and I'm not sure whether I agree with what you are trying to say here. That is in itself perhaps a slight indication of your type. And your next sentence is another indication that I would probably disagree with what you tried to say above.
No, it can't. And that has been proven by Gödel. You cannot separate true statements from false ones by their form. There are no general criteria for truth.
I believe that Quine's approach is fundamentally mistaken, at least in part.
I don't think that it is particularly important to decide whether there is a difference between analytical and synthetic statements, and that there are multiple ways to interpret experimental evidence is a totally trivial statement unless you want to conclude something more important from that, for example that there are multiple
correct ways to interpret experimental evidence -- in which case I totally disagree with it.
No clear conclusions can be drawn from this, but especially the bolded part might indicate that you are a Subjectivist in the Reinin dichotomies.
I still maintain that the general form of your way of expressing your thoughts is indicative of
, and you seem to have a rather accentuated focus on systems instead of the empirical world.
There are no strong indications of INTp in this post of yours, and there are at least some indications of INTj. My initial typing of you as INTj seems to have been corroborated, and so far it has not been in any serious danger of being falsified. Your most likely type is still INTj, based on what I know about you.