Abstract
Many researchers have had the idea of using the methods employed in causal search programs to try to shed light on quantum theory, and more particularly on the significance of the particular way that quantum theory predicts violations of Bell's Inequality for distant experiments. The causal search literature, in turn, employs certain proprietary use of technical terminology: particular causal models, under specific circumstances, can violate a condition denominated "Faithfulness" or "Naturalness" or "No Fine Tuning". Such models are then regarded as objectionable via the rhetorical method of dropping the scare quotes and acting as if the technical terminology has the same meaning as the natural-language words that have been introduced. I will argue, using particular examples, that this rhetorical trope is illegitimate. In particular, Bohmian Mechanics, which according to the technical terminology, is "fine-tuned" or "unfaithful" or "unnatural", is none of these things in the usual sense of these terms. So the causal modeling technical terminology is counterproductive in this instance.