I would like to explore two scientific theories that are often said to support radical constructivism. The first is the Schroedinger's cat theory. I don't know the details of this theory, but it argues that at any given moment, two contradictory realities may exist at the same time, such that the same cat may be at once dead and alive. I believe that the argument usually used to link this theory to RC is that objective reality is indeterminate, so that experience is supposed to take priority. This argument does not work, however, because, according to Schroedinger's theory, the cat is objectively both dead and alive, independent of anyone's experience. His theory therefore depends on some form of realism.

The second theory is the one that human expectations affect the metaphysical world, as evidenced by certain experiments with subatomic molecules. This theory also fails to support RC, for the very same reason. The theory once again assumes the existence of an objective world, this time in order that humans may affect it.

Is the principle of scientific fallibility consistent with the RC notion of viability?