I don't see myself as a poseiq, just a m'lameid. I rarely state a poseiq is wrong unless there is very strong evidence
[See example Below re: the Taz]
Rema Choshen Mishpat 25:1
Y"O if it appears to a dayyan and to the members of his generation - due to the strength of "rayot muchrachot" .... Yachol l'haleiq alav.
However, to raise a lamdusher question, to quote an internal or external steerah, to demand or request a s'vara does not require such a high threshold of proof - Mainly because I am not out to overturn Halachah p'suqah anyway.
As Wolpoe's First Law of TSBP states, we often know the WHAT w/o knowing the WHY
In a recent Avodah thread, this was apparent in the Rema Orach Hayyim 253 & 315 where he is meiqil if the food has not cooled, and a minimum of 2 contradictory schools of thought were brought to explain the WHY.
Ein Bishul Achar Bishulby Rabbi Howard Jachter
In YD 69, the Shach and the Taz debate the status of measuring the "issur" quotient embedded in used salt.
Shach: we don't know the volume of issur absorbed
Taz: Haticha naaseeit n'veilah. [HNN]
The Taz is shver beause HNN is NOT applied by the M'chabeir legabei sh'ar issurim. Aiui it's a tiyuvta on the Taz
But there is no nafqa minah AFAIK on how to treat the salt in question - only the s'vara is debated.
I don't need to bring rayos to prove a s'vara WRONG! Rather I only raise difficulties. The threshold is much lower here.
There are many difficult pisqei halachah that I respect l'maaseh - because I have no convincing p'saq to overturn it. But Afaik I don't need to check my brain at the door and not raise questions. That is not Talmudic-Rabbinic Judaism as I was taught.