ABSTRACT
Uncontrolled intuitivity in the structure of experiments is a problem for foundational analysis, because it weakens the validity of argumentation. Current practice must be improved, because inbuilt experimental presuppositions may hide for decades in the active experimental programs and thus tacitly constrain the generalizability of results. The crucial problem is, how is it possible to control the problems caused by the intuitiveness in experimental arguments? One solution might be offered by theoretical concepts. Conceptual knowledge is explicit, and it is essential when the preconditions of experiments are controlled. 1 Perhaps the conceptual systems could improve the validity of argumentation.
