Response to "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning"

The article written by Horst W.J Rittle, and Melvin M. Webber clearly distinguishes wicked problems from tame problems in how their specific characteristics differ and even the solutions and the manner in which they are sought for differ. I find it particularly interesting in how complex wicked problems actually are. When observing a mathematical or scientic problem that is extremely complex in nature, as this article states - there is always a true or false answer, so its either black or white, no shades of grey. Whereas wicked problems have so many factors that can continuously change, leaving quite a few things ambiguous. After reading this article, you get a clearer picture of the nature of wicked problems and how the actual "defining" of the problem is as complex as the "solution" of the problem. I think this article has given a great insight to the nature of wicked problems and addresses certain aspects of the defining/finding a solution process, that go unnoticed.