Indecisive Argument

An indecisive argument is one that doesn't decisively refute its target IGC. It might raise concerns, point at relevant factors, or update a vague intuition — but it leaves the IGC non-refuted if no other criticism suffices.

CF's sharp claim is: an indecisive argument is not "partial refutation"; it's no refutation at all. It doesn't get partial credit.

This is one of CF's hardest stances for newcomers. In ordinary discourse we say things like:

• "That's a strong argument but I think there's a stronger counter-argument."
• "I'm 70% convinced."
• "This is a weak refutation."
• "The evidence is somewhat in your favor."

CF rejects all of these. Either a criticism is decisive (it refutes the IGC) or it isn't (it doesn't, regardless of how it feels). When an argument is indecisive, the proper response is to find a better criticism, not to weight the indecisive one.

What this does not mean

CF doesn't say indecisive arguments are useless. They can be:

• Heuristics for where to look harder for a decisive criticism.
• Conversation tools to clarify what the disagreement is.
• Inputs to a brainstorm about possible refutations.

But they don't refute. An IGC is refuted only when at least one decisive criticism is in hand.

"Indecisive arguments simply don't refute IGCs; arguments that can't decisively refute anything don't get partial credit." — criticalfallibilism.com