ABSTRACT
Assertions are the building blocks of science. They imply predictions about how the world works, but they are infused with inherent uncertainty. A test of an assertion based on future data or future observations is a literal impossibility, as all data and observations pertain to what can or has been observed in the present or past. Some arguments appear reasonable to the point of being totally acceptable, even though not based on a fully articulated logic. Indeed, humans habitually argue in terms of an implicit logic, and scientists commonly report tests of assertions without fully disclosing the underlying logic, whatever it may have been. A predictive approach in assessing assertions assumes some stability in how the world works, but that assumption has been questioned. An ambiguous substantive word/term precludes sufficient empirical applicability, and ambiguity can be reduced only by the pursuit of conceptual clarity.
