George,

> I don’t think that “metaphysics” can be “dissolved” into science because that proposition itself is a kind of metaphysical statement. <

No, it isn’t. It’s a statement that comes from a view in philosophy of science.

> The logical positivist’s narrowminded worldview implies that all worldviews are meaningless <

No, it doesn’t. It only implies that if you want to talk about something then you better be prepared to show evidence for that something. Besides, this isn’t an attempt to go back to positivism anyway. Indeed, it is closer to Hume’s position, to which you say you are sympathetic.

> Doesn’t your philosophical criticism imply certain “truth-bearing pronouncements about how the world is”? <

It does. But I don’t take any such pronouncement seriously unless there is evidence for it.