Naturalness, Extra-Empirical Theory Assessments, and the Implications of Skepticism

Naturalness is an extra-empirical quality that aims to assess plausibility of a theory. Finetuning measures are often deputized to quantify the task. However, knowing statistical distributions on parameters appears necessary. Such meta-theories are not known yet. A critical discussion of these issues is presented, including their possible resolutions in fixed points. Both agreement to and skepticism of naturalness's utility remains credible, as is skepticism to any extra-empirical theory assessment (SEETA) that claims to identify "more correct" theories that are equally empirically adequate. The severe implications of SEETA are set forward in some detail. We conclude with a summary and discussion of the viability of three main viewpoints toward naturalness and fine-tuning, where the "moderate naturalness position" is suggested to be most appealing, not suffering from the disquietudes of the extreme pro- and anti-naturalness positions.