Information AboutPseudoscience |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT PSEUDOSCIENCE | |
| pejoratives | |
| pseudosciencepejoratives | |
| pseudoscience | |
| pseudo-scholarship | |
| voodoo science | |
| alternate reality | |
|
''Pseudoscience'' is a term applied to a body of alleged knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that is portrayed as Scientific but diverges substantially from the required standards for scientific work or is unsupported by sufficient scientific research."''Pseudoscientific - pretending to be scientific, falsely represented as being scientific''", from the ''Oxford American Dictionary'', published by the Oxford English Dictionary . (See '' Scientific Method ''.) The term "pseudoscience" around 1844 as a combination of the Greek root ''pseudo'', meaning false, and the Latin ''scientia'', meaning knowledge or a field of knowledge. It generally has Negative Connotations because it asserts that things so labeled are inaccurately or deceptively described as science. As such, those labeled as practicing or advocating a "pseudoscience" often reject this classification. INTRODUCTION The standards for determining whether a body of alleged Knowledge , Methodology , Field , Belief , or practice is scientific can vary from field to field, but involve agreed principles including Reproducibility and Intersubjective Verifiability . These attempt to ensure that relevant evidence can be reproduced and/or measured given the same conditions — which allows further investigation to determine whether a Hypothesis or Theory related to given Phenomena is both Valid and Reliable for use by others, including other Scientists and Researchers . Scientific Method s are expected to be applied throughout, and Bias is expected to be controlled or eliminated, either directly, through the manipulation of factors, by Double-blind studies, or statistically through fair sampling procedures. All gathered data, including experimental/environmental conditions, are expected to be documented for scrutiny and published for Peer Review , thereby allowing further Experiments or Studies to be conducted to confirm or Falsify results, as well as to determine other important factors such as Statistical Significance , Confidence Intervals , and Margins Of Error . Fulfilment of these requirements allows other researchers and practitioners a reasonable opportunity to assess whether to rely upon those results in their own scientific work or in a particular field of Applied Science , Technology , Therapy or other form of practice. In the mid-20th Century Karl Popper suggested the additional criterion of Falsifiability . Certain theories cannot be proven false under any circumstance, for example, the theory that God created the universe. Such theories may be true, but are not scientific; they lie outside the scope of (at least present-day) science. Another criterion applicable to theoretical work is a Heuristic such as Occam's Razor . These include the historiographical approach of Imre Lakatos in his Methodology Of Scientific Research Programmes . Some historians and philosophers of science (including Paul Feyerabend ) have argued, from a Sociology Of Knowledge perspective, that a clear philosophical distinction between science and pseudoscience is neither possible nor desirable. Both the theories and methodologies of science evolve, sometimes very slowly, and in other cases quite rapidly. In addition, standards applicable to one branch of science may not be those employed in another branch. For instance, physicists may expect a 100% correlation of cause and effect in certain areas of inquiry, any significant divergence from this signifying a serious lack of understanding of the causal factors, the method of measurement and/or the testing environment; whereas psychologists may find 5% statistical correlation worthy of consideration if it can be consistently repeated. Even within a particular field, specific standards may vary widely. Some critics of pseudoscience consider some or all forms of pseudoscience to be harmless entertainment. Others, such as ) The concept of pseudoscience as an antagonist to ''bona fide'' science appears to have emerged in the mid- 19th Century . The first recorded use of the word 'pseudo-science' appears to have been in 1844 in the ''Northern Journal of Medicine I.'' 387 "That opposite kind of innovation which pronounces what has been recognised as a branch of science, to have been a pseudo-science, composed merely of so-called facts, connected together by misapprehensions under the disguise of principles". IDENTIFYING PSEUDOSCIENCE A body of knowledge, field, or practice is reasonably called a pseudoscience when (1) it has presented itself as science or scientific; and (2) it fails to meet the accepted Norms of scientific research, most importantly the use of Scientific Method . Within the various expectations of legitimate scientific methodology, by far the most important is that of making documentation of data and methodology available for close and repeated scrutiny by other Scientists and Researchers , as well as making available any additional relevant information used to arrive at particular results or methods of practice. To the degree that thorough documentation of data and method is unavailable for detailed scrutiny by others, a body of knowledge, practice, or field of inquiry will tend, as a result, to meet at least several of the characteristics of pseudoscience introduced below. Pseudoscience can be identified by a combination of the following characteristics. As more and more of these characteristics are met, further credibility may be attached to a claim that a particular field or practice is pseudoscientific:
Some characteristics that are often true of pseudoscience are also true to some extent of all new genuinely scientific work. These include:
Pseudoscience is distinguishable from Revelation , Theology , or Spirituality in that it claims to offer insight into the physical world by "scientific" means. Systems of thought that rely upon "divine" or "inspired" knowledge are not considered pseudoscience if they do not claim either to be scientific or to overturn well-established science. There are also bodies of practical knowledge that are not claimed to be scientific. These are also not pseudoscience. The term "pseudoscience" is often used by adherents of fields considered pseudoscientific to criticize their mainstream equivalents. Hence, for instance, supporters of and expert Peer Review . Another class of pseudoscience, called Pseudoskepticism , refers to non-rigorous Skepticism that is itself erroneously presented as scientific. PSEUDOSCIENCE CONTRASTED WITH PROTOSCIENCE Pseudoscience also differs from Protoscience . Protoscience is a term sometimes used to describe a hypothesis that has not yet been tested adequately by the scientific method, but which is otherwise consistent with existing science or which, where inconsistent, offers reasonable account of the inconsistency. It may also describe the transition from a body of practical knowledge into a scientific field. Pseudoscience, in contrast, is characteristically inadequately tested; indeed, may even be untestable in principle. If tests appear to contradict its evidence, supporters may insist that the existing scientific results are false. Pseudoscience is often unresponsive to ordinary scientific procedures (for example, peer review, publication in standard journals). If untestable claims have been made, the failure to test and disprove these claims is often cited as evidence of the truth of the pseudoscience. The boundaries between pseudoscience, protoscience, and "real" science are often unclear to non-specialist observers and sometimes even to experts. Especially where there is a significant cultural or historical distance (as, for example, modern Chemistry reflecting on Alchemy ), protosciences can be misinterpreted as pseudoscientific. Many people have tried to offer objective distinctions, with mixed success. Often the term pseudoscience is used simply as a Pejorative to express the speaker's low opinion of a given field, regardless of any objective measures. If the claims of a given field can be experimentally tested and methodological standards are upheld, it is real scientific work, however odd, astonishing, or intuitively unacceptable. If claims made are inconsistent with existing experimental results or established theory, but the methodology is sound, caution should be used; much of science consists of testing hypotheses that turn out to be false. In such a case, the work may be better described as ''as yet unproven'' or ''research in progress''. Conversely, if the claims of any given "science" cannot be experimentally tested or scientific standards are not upheld in these tests, it fails to meet the modern criteria for a science. In such circumstances it may be difficult to distinguish which of two opposing "sciences" are valid; for example, both the proponents and opponents of the Kyoto Protocol on Global Warming have recruited the help of scientists to endorse contradictory positions, because of differing Political goals. The enlistment of science in the service of Politics or business is sometimes called " Junk Science ". Ultimately, whether something is pseudoscience or not has less to do with the ideas under study than the approach used to study or justify them. Acupuncture , for instance, while it involves a Prescientific System , is not inherently pseudoscientific. This is because most of the claims can be tested scientifically so acupuncture can be viewed as a protoscience. Of course, a scientific investigation might fail to support the claims of acupuncture. In the presence of a number of tests that successfully falsify a particular claim, insisting that the claim is still scientifically supported becomes pseudoscience. PROBLEMS OF DEMARCATION See Also: Demarcation problem After more than a century of active dialogue among Philosophers Of Science and practicing Scientists of numerous widely varied Fields , the question of precise boundaries of science remains less than completely settled. As a consequence the issue of exactly what constitutes pseudoscience continues to be controversial. Nonetheless, broad consensus exists on certain basics of Scientific Method and the Problem Of Demarcation both within the Scientific Community and among philosophers generally. Many commentators and practicioners of science, as well as supporters of fields of inquiry and practices accused of pseudoscience, have called into question whether there is a rigorous way to tell the difference, especially since many disciplines currently thought of as science exhibited at one point in their development features which are often cited as those of pseudoscience, such as lack of reproducibility (for example, due to the necessity of large, expensive, and specially created instruments), or the inability to create falsifying experiments. Thus, many accepted scientific theories of our time — including the theory of Evolution (Thagard, 131 ff), Plate Tectonics (Thagard, 157 ff), the Big Bang (a term originally chosen by Fred Hoyle to poke fun at the idea), and Quantum Mechanics — were criticized by some as being pseudo-scientific when they were first proposed. In retrospect, it is clear that this was a response to the fundamental challenge they posed to accepted doctrines, and a reflection of the difficulty in gathering evidence for new theories. Further, because of the heterogeneous nature of the scientific enterprise itself, it is increasingly difficult to create a set of criteria which can apply to all disciplines at all times. PSEUDOMATHEMATICS Pseudomathematics is a form of mathematics-like activity undertaken by either non-mathematicians or mathematicians themselves which do not conform to the rigorous standards usually applied to mathematical theories. CRITICISM OF THE CONCEPT OF PSEUDOSCIENCE The term ''pseudoscience'' has been criticised as impossible to define with the degree of rigor commonly demanded of scientific definitions. Although various definitions have been proposed, controversy remains over what the term really means. When seen from the perspective of Scientific Paradigms , the term ''pseudoscience'' can be seen as one of many tools used by the establishment to describe a perceived threat. Thomas Kuhn postulated that proponents of competing paradigms may resort to Political means (such as Invective ) to garner the support of a public which lacks the ability to judge competing scientific theories on their merits. FIELDS ALLEGED TO BE PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC AND PHENOMENA ASSOCIATED WITH PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC METHODS OF STUDY ''Main article: List Of Alternative, Speculative, And Disputed Theories '' The following is a list of theories and fields of endeavor which their critics fault as failing to meet the Norm s and Standard s of scientific practice in one way or another. Additional fields where research results are simply ambiguous or inadequate may be found on the Prescientific Systems page.
REFERENCES
;Main works of modern philosophy of science
;Further reading
SEE ALSO
People
Lists
NOTES |
|
|