Suppose it were true that the standard quantum model and the new string theory both saved the core observational problem of what kind of universe we have. But string theory not only determined the 18 undetermined parameters in the standard model, but provided a major hint of how to unify quantum theory with relativity theory. We would be in no position to declare that string theory was true, or even that the evidence for it was overwhelming, because the distinction of what is coincidence and what is fundamental process is most often what needs to be determined by future testing. However, there would be little doubt in the distinct fruitfulness of string theory and the wisdom of pursuing its development. Furthermore, as to why this is so would not be because of just personality and circumstance, of a need for unity in our lives, belief in a benevolent deity, or a political and economic power shift, but simply because we have a good ampliative reason to believe that the world works in some sort of unified fashion, responding to us along many fronts, with unconnected differences in those responses only apparent.
Legend says that good scientists are always looking straight ahead at the objective evidence.
Relativists say that they are always looking over their shoulders, worrying about the social and political environment, and sleepwalking forward. My way of putting this is that scientists are indeed messy human beings, as our we all, and it is precisely because they have a lot to worry about over their shoulders that they pay acute attention to the epistemic situation in front of them. I am not arguing that the Copernican episode was as clear as the string theory example. In fact, we need to see that the situation was messy to understand why every competent astronomer did not immediately back heliostasis. However, I am arguing that the situation was sufficiently close to understand why both supporters and nonsupporters of heliostasis abandoned strict Ptolemaic geostasis when its key parameters were perceived to be undetermined, offering a disturbingly flexible response to the core observational problem.