Information AboutPseudoscience |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT PSEUDOSCIENCE | |
| pejoratives | |
| pseudosciencepejoratives | |
| pseudoscience | |
| pseudo-scholarship | |
| voodoo science | |
| alternate reality | |
|
Pseudoscience is any body of knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that claims to be Scientific or is made to appear scientific, but does not adhere to the basic requirements of the Scientific Method ."''Pseudoscientific - pretending to be scientific, falsely represented as being scientific''", from the ''Oxford American Dictionary'', published by the Oxford English Dictionary ."''A pretended or spurious science; a collection of related beliefs about the world mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method or as having the status that scientific truths now have.''", from the Oxford English Dictionary Second Edition 1989.For example, Hewitt et al. ''Conceptual Physical Science'' Addison Wesley; 3 edition (July 18, 2003) ISBN 0-321-05173-4, Bennett et al. ''The Cosmic Perspective'' 3e Addison Wesley; 3 edition (July 25, 2003) ISBN 0-8053-8738-2''See also'', e.g., Gauch HG Jr. ''Scientific Method in Practice'' (2003) The term ''pseudoscience'' is based on the Greek root ''pseudo-'' (false or pretending) and ''science'' (derived from Latin ''scientia'', meaning knowledge). The first recorded use was in 1843 by French physiologist François Magendie Magendie, F (1843) ''An Elementary Treatise on Human Physiology.'' 5th Ed. Tr. John Revere. New York: Harper, p 150. Magendie refers to phrenology as "''a pseudo-science of the present day''" (note the hyphen). considered a pioneer in experimental physiology. The term has Negative Connotations , because it is used to indicate that subjects so labeled are inaccurately or deceptively portrayed as science.However, from the "them vs. us" polarization that its usage engenders, the term may also have a positive function because "'' {Link without Title} derogatory labeling of others often includes an unstated self-definition'' "(p.266); and, from this, the application of the term also implies "''a unity of science, a privileged tree of knowledge or space from which the pseudoscience is excluded, and the user's right to belong is asserted'' " (p.286) -- Still A & Dryden W (2004) "The Social Psychology of "Pseudoscience": A Brief History", ''J Theory Social Behav'' 34:265-290 Accordingly, those labeled as practicing or advocating a "pseudoscience" normally reject this classification. As it is taught in certain introductory science classes, pseudoscience is any subject that appears superficially to be scientific or whose proponents state is scientific but nevertheless contravenes the entitled "Science & Pseudoscience" {Link without Title} Beyond the initial introductory analyses offered in science classes, there is some Epistemological disagreement about whether it is possible to distinguish "science" from "pseudoscience" in a reliable and Objective way.The philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend in particular is associated with the view that attempts to distinguish science from non-science are flawed and pernicious. "The idea that science can, and should, be run according to fixed and universal rules, is both unrealistic and pernicious. ... the idea is detrimental to science, for it neglects the complex physical and historical conditions which influence scientific change. It makes our science less adaptable and more dogmatic:" {Link without Title} Pseudosciences may be characterised by the use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims, over-reliance on confirmation rather than refutation, lack of openness to testing by other experts, and a lack of progress in theory development. BACKGROUND The standards for determining whether a body of Knowledge , Methodology , or Practice is scientific can vary from field to field, but involve agreed principles including Reproducibility and Intersubjective Verifiability .''e.g. '' Gauch HG Jr. ''Scientific Method in Practice'' (2003) 3-5 ''ff'' Such principles aim 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. It is expected that the Scientific Method will be applied throughout, and that Bias will be controlled or eliminated, 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 made available for Peer Review , thereby allowing further Experiment s or studies to be conducted to confirm or Falsify results, as well as to determine other important factors such as Statistical Significance , Confidence Interval s, and Margins Of Error .Gauch (2003), 191 ''ff'', especially Chapter 6, "Probability", and Chapter 7, "inductive Logic and Statistics" Fulfillment of these requirements allows others a reasonable opportunity to assess whether to rely upon the reported 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 has suggested the categories of "belief fields" and "research fields" to help distinguish between science and pseudoscience. Bunge M (1983) "Demarcating science from pseudoscience" Fundamenta Scientiae 3:369-388 Philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend has argued, from a Sociology Of Knowledge perspective, that a distinction between science and non-science is neither possible nor desirable.Feyerabend P ''Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge'' (1975) {Link without Title} For a perspective on Feyerabend from within the scientific community, see, e.g., Gauch (2003) at p.4: "Such critiques are unfamiliar to most scientists, although some may have heard a few distant shots from the so-called science wars." Among the issues which can make the distinction difficult are that both the theories and methodologies of science evolve at differing rates in response to new data.Thagard PR (1978) "Why astrology is a pseudoscience" (1978) In PSA 1978, Volume 1, ed. Asquith PD and Hacking I (East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, 1978) 223 ff. Thagard writes, at 227, 228: "We can now propose the following principle of demarcation: A theory or discipline which purports to be scientific is pseudoscientific if and only if: it has been less progressive than alternative theories over a long period of time, and faces many unsolved problems; but the community of practitioners makes little attempt to develop the theory towards solutions of the problems, shows no concern for attempts to evaluate the theory in relation to others, and is selective in considering confirmations and non confirmations." In addition, the specific standards applicable to one field of science may not be those employed in other fields. Thagard also writes from a sociological perspective and states that "elucidation of how science differs from pseudoscience is the philosophical side of an attempt to overcome public neglect of genuine science." Both the Skeptics and the Brights Movement , most prominently represented by Richard Dawkins , Mario Bunge , Carl Sagan and James Randi , consider all forms of pseudoscience to be harmful, whether or not they result in immediate harm to their adherents. These critics generally consider that the practice of pseudoscience may occur for a number of reasons, ranging from simple naïveté about the nature of science and the Scientific Method , to deliberate deception for financial or political gain. At the extreme, issues of personal health and safety may be very directly involved, for example in the case of physical or mental therapy or treatment, or in assessing safety risks. In such instances the potential for direct harm to patients, clients, the general public, or the environment may be an issue in assessing pseudoscience. (See also Junk Science .) The concept of pseudoscience as antagonistic to ''bona fide'' science appears to have emerged in the mid- 19th Century . Among the first recorded uses of the word "pseudo-science" was in 1844 in the ''Northern Journal of Medicine'', I 387: "That opposite kind of innovation which pronounces what has been recognized 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 field, practice, or body of knowledge might reasonably be called pseudoscientific when (1) it is presented as consistent with the accepted Norms of scientific research; but (2) it demonstrably fails to meet these norms, most importantly, in misuse of Scientific Method .Cover JA, Curd M (Eds, 1998) ''Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues'', 1-82 Subjects may be considered pseudoscientific for various reasons; Popper considered Astrology to be pseudoscientific simply because astrologers keep their claims so vague that they could never be refuted, whereas Thagard considers astrology pseudoscientific because its practitioners make little effort to develop the theory, show no concern for attempts to critically evaluate the theory in relation to others, and are selective in considering evidence. More generally, Thagard stated that pseudoscience tends to focus on resemblances rather than cause-effect relations. Science is also distinguishable from Revelation , Theology , or Spirituality in that it claims to offer insight into the physical world obtained by "scientific" means. Systems of thought that derive from divine or inspired knowledge are not considered pseudoscience if they do not claim either to be scientific or to overturn well-established science. Some statements and commonly held beliefs in and expert Peer Review . If the claims of a given field can be experimentally tested and methodological standards are upheld, it is not "pseudoscience", however odd, astonishing, or counter-intuitive. If claims made are inconsistent with existing experimental results or established theory, but the methodology is sound, caution should be used; science consists of testing hypotheses which may turn out to be false. In such a case, the work may be better described as ideas that are ''not yet generally accepted''. The following have been proposed to be indicators of poor scientific reasoning. Use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims
Over-reliance on confirmation rather than refutation
e.g. {Link without Title} ''Macmilllan Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' Vol 3, "Fallacies" 174 ''ff'', esp. section on "Ignoratio elenchi"
Lack of openness to testing by other experts
Lack of progress
Thagard (1978) ''op cit'' 223 ''ff''
Personalization of issues
e.g. {Link without Title} Use of misleading language
DEMOGRAPHICS The National Science Foundation stated that, in the USA, "pseudoscientific" beliefs became more widespread during the 1990s, peaked near 2001 and mildly declined since; nevertheless, pseudoscientific beliefs remain common in the USA. National Science Board. 2006. ''Science and Engineering Indicators 2006'' Two volumes. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (volume 1, NSB-06-01; NSB 06-01A) As a result, according to the NSF report, there is a lack of knowledge of pseudoscientific issues in society and pseudoscientific practices are commonly followed. Bunge (1999) states that "A survey on public knowledge of science in the United States showed that in 1988 50% of American adults [rejected evolution, and 88% [believed] astrology is a science'". Commentators on pseudoscience perceive it in many fields; for example Pseudomathematics is a term used for mathematics-like activity undertaken either by non-mathematicians or mathematicians themselves which does not conform to the rigorous standards usually applied to mathematical theorems. CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY Neurologists and clinical psychologists are concerned about the increasing amount of what they consider pseudoscience promoted in Psychotherapy and popular Psychology , and also about what they see as pseudoscientific therapies such as Neuro-linguistic Programming , EMDR , Rebirthing , Reparenting, and Primal Therapy being adopted by government and professional bodies and by the public. e.g. Drenth (2003) Herbert JD, ''et al.'' (2000) Science and pseudoscience in the development of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing: implications for clinical psychology. ''Clin Psychol Rev.'' 20:945-71 [PMID 11098395 ) They state that scientifically unsupported therapies used by popular or folk psychology might harm vulnerable members of the public, undermine legitimate therapies, and tend to spread misconceptions about the nature of the mind and brain to society at large. Norcross ''et al''.Norcross J.C. Garofalo. A. Koocher.G.P. (2006) Discredited psychological treatments and tests: a Delphi poll. ''Professional Psychology. Research and Practice'', 37: 515-522. have approached the science/pseudoscience issue by conducting a survey of experts that seeks to specify which theory or therapy is considered to be definitely discredited, and they outline 14 fields that have been definitely discredited. |
|
|