Talk:Indeterminacy problem

Fallacious argument
"Upon careful analysis, however, this argument seems an incomplete answer; given that there is a finite amount of experimental evidence, it also makes sense that there should be a finite amount of social forces as well, and still the problem persists."

This appears to be a fallacious argument; the general idea that social forces in some way influence science will not be refuted by the assertion that an infinite number of theories may be formed, exploring the precise manner in which this is taking place.

As in the overarching topic, only any specific theory about a state of affairs may be challenged this way - not the ontological premise that experimental data has some kind of connection to phenomena.

Laughlyn (talk) 22:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Definition
Where it is used as an argument against the rational value of scientific thought, it is also an argument from ignorance that throws the baby out with the bathwater, but I could not find any sources saying so. Might be just better to remove the statement 'it is used as an argument against the rational value of scientific thought' from the lede, as that is not sourced either? Maybe later. Anarchangel (talk) 06:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)