Reaction to "Modern Hieroglyphs" by Lupton

Lupton describes the use of Isotype symbols as a "language equipped to use design and theory as tools for unearthing new questions and constructing new answers." Designed by Otoo Neurath in the 1920's, he grandfathered symbols as language, furthermore using visual-based learning as an "international hieroglyphic of public information." Although I agree that these symbols can objectively state obvious human-oriented living, he holds too much pressure on observation as the key to knowledge and truth. In science for instance, observational knowledge deems to prove very little, and is often considered fake science. Pure observation reveals little about what is actually present, and more on the amount of light our subjective senses can perceive. This is shown in Darwin's "Origins of Species", when he arbitrarily grouped two similar biotic organisms by observational traits, then placed them into groupings which founded the basis of our natural kingdom. Later, many of his observational findings found to be false, due to the fact that he placed such heavy emphasis on this observational knowledge. Similarly, these modern hieroglyphics do something of the same, and do not project objective, international signs of use and meaning. Although Darwin and Neurath's findings and product do project a good guide to the start of an "international language", they also fail to project any truth to an objective language of the world, if that is even possible.