The underdetermination problem identified by Belot and Earman shows that quantization ambiguities in background-independent theories systematically infect putative physical results.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Background-independent theories(as the type of theory affected by the problem): Physics theories that don't assume a fixed backdrop (like spacetime) that everything happens 'in'—instead, space and time emerge from the theory itself.
Belot and Earman(as philosophers who discovered the underdetermination problem): Two philosophers of physics who identified a major problem in how we understand certain physical theories—basically, they showed that multiple different mathematical descriptions can describe the same physical situation, making it unclear which description is the 'real' one.
Putative physical results(as the supposedly-physical answers that get corrupted by the ambiguities): Conclusions about how the physical world works that seem to follow from a theory but might not actually be reliable or real.
Quantization ambiguities(as the source of confusion in background-independent theories)

Based on where you are in your exploration