As far as I know, the verification of metaphysical axioms is limited to telling if they are consistent (which I guess this could help with) and telling whether or not they conform the reader's preexisting notions. We already know that most of our preexisting notions about the world are wrong, so doesn't that make metaphysics a version of math that's biased <i>against</i> having the right axioms? Mathematicians are biased very slightly towards choosing axioms that are representative of some truth because of cross-pollination with physics but otherwise make no claims, but it seems to me that philosophers who study metaphysics purport to be studying something other than "just math."