Yes. But they use that criteria to say that if it can’t be empirically verified, it is meaningless and adds nothing to human knowledge. In other words, anything that can’t be empirically verified is just imagination.
This doctrine, also known as logical positivism or simply positivism, held that all knowledge lies within the purview of science.
What I’m arguing is in the context that empirical verification should be applied in the field of science where it is meant to be applied, not to other fields like metaphysics which itself is a field of study that deals with reality that lies totally outside of empirical verification. There’s a big difference between positivism and what I’m saying.