Results for 'Pseudoscience'

77 found
Order:
  1. Bullshit, Pseudoscience and Pseudophilosophy.Victor Moberger - 2020 - Theoria 86 (5):595-611.
    In this article I give a unified account of three phenomena: bullshit, pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy. My aims are partly conceptual, partly evaluative. Drawing on Harry Frankfurt's seminal analysis of bullshit, I give an account of the three phenomena and of how they are related, and I use this account to explain what is bad about all three. More specifically, I argue that what is defective about pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy is precisely that they are special cases of bullshit. Apart (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  2. Pseudoscience and Idiosyncratic Theories of Rational Belief.Nicholas Shackel - 2013 - In M. Pigliucci & M. Boudry (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. pp. 417-438.
    I take pseudoscience to be a pretence at science. Pretences are innumerable, limited only by our imagination and credulity. As Stove points out, ‘numerology is actually quite as different from astrology as astrology is from astronomy’ (Stove 1991, 187). We are sure that ‘something has gone appallingly wrong’ (Stove 1991, 180) and yet ‘thoughts…can go wrong in a multiplicity of ways, none of which anyone yet understands’ (Stove 1991, 190). Often all we can do is give a careful description (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Pseudoscience.Massimo Pigliucci - 2013 - In Byron Kaldis (ed.), Encyclopedia of Philosophy and the Social Sciences. SAGE.
    The term pseudoscience refers to a highly heterogeneous set of practices, beliefs, and claims sharing the property of appearing to be scientific when in fact they contradict either scientific findings or the methods by which science proceeds. Classic examples of pseudoscience include astrology, parapsychology, and ufology; more recent entries are the denial of a causal link between the HIV virus and AIDS or the claim that vaccines cause autism. To distinguish between science and pseudoscience is part of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4. Pseudosciences: A new threat to the secular humanist project.Víctor García-Belaunde Velarde & Piero Gayozzo - 2023 - Desde El Sur 15 (2): e0026.
    Historically, secular humanism has been in conflict with religious thought in the academic and social spheres. This article supports the thesis that in modern times pseu-dosciences and pseudoscientific thinking are a threat to the humanist project, comparable to religious fundamen-talism. To prove it, the concept of Secular Humanism and how it is threatened by religious fundamentalism is explai-ned. This is followed by the definition of what pseudos-ciences are and what pseudoscientific thinking is. Subse-quently, the way how pseudosciences threaten the secular (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Pseudoscience.Bradley Monton - 2013 - In Martin Curd & Stathis Psillos (eds.), Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science, Second Edition. Routledge. pp. 468-479.
    I insightfully discuss the question: what is pseudoscience?
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. Pseudoscience et falsifiabilité.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    La délimitation entre science et pseudoscience fait partie de la tâche plus générale qui consiste à déterminer quelles croyances sont épistémologiquement justifiées. Karl Popper a proposé la falsifiabilité comme critère important de distinction entre science et pseudoscience. Il soutient que la vérification et la confirmation ne peuvent jouer aucun rôle dans la formulation d'un critère de délimitation satisfaisant. Au lieu de cela, il propose que les théories scientifiques soient distinguées des théories non-scientifiques par des affirmations vérifiables que les (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Tant de pseudosciences, si peu de pseudotechnologies.Sven Ove Hansson - 2022 - Mεtascience: Discours Général Scientifique 2:267-283.
    Après un examen des emplois antérieurs du terme « pseudotechnologie », une définition est proposée : « Une pseudotechnologie est une technologie présumée, irrémédiablement dysfonctionnelle pour l’usage auquel elle est destinée, puisqu’elle est basée sur des principes de construction qui ne peuvent pas être mis en œuvre ». La relation entre la pseudotechnologie et la pseudoscience est examinée, tout comme la relation entre la pseudotechnologie et le concept beaucoup plus faible de malfonction technologique. Une explication est proposée de la (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. With all this Pseudoscience, Why so Little Pseudotechnology?Sven Ove Hansson - 2022 - Mεtascience: Scientific General Discourse 2:226-241.
    After a review of previous uses of the term “pseudotechnology”, a definition is proposed: “A pseudotechnology is an alleged technology that is irreparably dysfunctional for its intended purpose since it is based on construction principles that cannot be made to work”. The relationship between pseudotechnology and pseudoscience is discussed, and so is the relationship between pseudotechnology and the much weaker concept of technological malfunction. An explanation is offered of why pseudotechnology is much more seldom referred to than pseudoscience: (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. What makes weird beliefs thrive? The epidemiology of pseudoscience.Maarten Boudry, Stefaan Blancke & Massimo Pigliucci - 2015 - Philosophical Psychology 28 (8):1177-1198.
    What makes beliefs thrive? In this paper, we model the dissemination of bona fide science versus pseudoscience, making use of Dan Sperber's epidemiological model of representations. Drawing on cognitive research on the roots of irrational beliefs and the institutional arrangement of science, we explain the dissemination of beliefs in terms of their salience to human cognition and their ability to adapt to specific cultural ecologies. By contrasting the cultural development of science and pseudoscience along a number of dimensions, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  10. Prove it! The Burden of Proof Game in Science vs. Pseudoscience Disputes.Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry - 2014 - Philosophia 42 (2):487-502.
    The concept of burden of proof is used in a wide range of discourses, from philosophy to law, science, skepticism, and even in everyday reasoning. This paper provides an analysis of the proper deployment of burden of proof, focusing in particular on skeptical discussions of pseudoscience and the paranormal, where burden of proof assignments are most poignant and relatively clear-cut. We argue that burden of proof is often misapplied or used as a mere rhetorical gambit, with little appreciation of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  11. Is psychoanalysis a pseudoscience? Reevaluating the doctrine using a multicriteria list.Clarice de Medeiros Chaves Ferreira - 2021 - Debates Em Psiquiatria 11:1-33.
    Introduction: In the past, psychoanalysis was classified as a pseudoscience. Karl Popper was one of those who objected to the idea that psychoanalysis is a science, using falsifiability. However, falsifiability cannot be considered sufficient anymore, since it carries major weaknesses and better alternatives to address the issue are available. Objective: This article intends to evaluate the scientific status of psychoanalysis concerning the demarcation problem. Method: In order to do so, Sven Ove Hansson’s criteria were used. His proposal consists of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12. The hypothesis that saves the day: ad hoc reasoning in pseudoscience.Maarten Boudry - 2013 - Logique Et Analyse 223:245-258.
    What is wrong with ad hoc hypotheses? Ever since Popper’s falsificationist account of adhocness, there has been a lively philosophical discussion about what constitutes adhocness in scientific explanation, and what, if anything, distinguishes legitimate auxiliary hypotheses from illicit ad hoc ones. This paper draws upon distinct examples from pseudoscience to provide us with a clearer view as to what is troubling about ad hoc hypotheses. In contrast with other philosophical proposals, our approach retains the colloquial, derogative meaning of adhocness, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  13. Bunkum, Flim‐Flam and Quackery: Pseudoscience as a Philosophical Problem.Andrew Lugg - 1987 - Dialectica 41 (3):221-230.
    In the first half of the paper, it is argued that while the prospects for a criterion for demarcating scientific theories from pseudoscientific ones are exceedingly dim, it is a mistake to fall back to the position that these differ only with regard to how well they are confirmed. One may admit that different pseudoscientific theories are flawed in different ways yet still insist that their flaws are structural rather than empirical in character. In the second half of the paper, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  14. Vice Epistemology of Believers in Pseudoscience.Filip Tvrdý - 2021 - Filozofia 76 (10):735-751.
    The demarcation of pseudoscience has been one of the most important philosophical tasks since the 1960s. During the 1980s, an atmosphere of defeatism started to spread among philosophers of science, some of them claimed the failure of the demarcation project. I defend that the more auspicious approach to the problem might be through the intellectual character of epistemic agents, i.e., from the point of view of vice epistemology. Unfortunately, common lists of undesirable character features are usually based on a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15. Science and pseudoscience - Falsifiability.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    The delimitation between science and pseudoscience is part of the more general task of determining which beliefs are epistemologically justified. Standards for demarcation may vary by domain, but several basic principles are universally accepted. Karl Popper proposed falsifiability as an important criterion in distinguishing between science and pseudoscience. He argues that verification and confirmation can play no role in formulating a satisfactory criterion of demarcation. Instead, it proposes that scientific theories be distinguished from non-scientific theories by testable claims (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. Philosophy as a pseudoscience.Las Tahir - manuscript
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Truth in the age of crisis: pitfalls of pseudoscience.Aleksandra Zorić - 2021 - In Nenad Cekić (ed.), Етика и истина у доба кризе. Belgrade: University of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy. pp. 255-269.
    An old philosophical problem of delineating science from pseudoscience has in today’s world far superseded the task of unearthing sufficient and necessary conditions which science should be able to satisfy and on which pseudoscience would fall short. Our interests have shifted from the search for the rigorous criteria of demarcation, to describing various scientific and pseudoscientific activities – as well as bringing the psychological backgrounds of beliefs in numerous pseudoscientific theories to light. We aim to pinpoint some of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. [Early First Draft] Must Minkowski Spacetime be Categorized as Pseudoscience? (Revisiting the legitimacy of Mansouri-Sexl test theory).Shiva Meucci - manuscript
    Here we discuss and hope to solve a problem rooted in the necessity of the study of historical science, the slow deviation of physics education over the past century, and how the loss of crucial contextual tool has debilitated discussion of a very important yet specialized physics sub-topic: the isotropy of the one-way speed of light. Most notably, the information that appears to be most commonly missing is not simply the knowledge of the historical fact that Poincare and Lorentz presented (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. A Secondary Tool for Demarcation Problem: Logical Fallacies.Tevfik Uyar - 2017 - Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi / Cilicia Journal of Philosophy 4 (3):85-104.
    According to Thagard, the behavior of practitioners of a field may also be used for demarcation between science and pseudoscience due to its social dimension in addition to the epistemic one. I defended the tendency of pseudoscientists to commit fallacies, and the number of fallacies they commit can be a secondary tool for demarcation problem and this tool is consistent with Thagardian approach. In this paper, I selected the astrology as the case and I revealed nine types of logical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  20. An Analysis of the Demarcation Problem in Philosophy of Science and Its Application to Homeopathy.Alper Bilgehan Yardımcı - 2018 - Flsf 1 (25):91-107.
    This paper presents a preliminary analysis of homeopathy from the perspective of the demarcation problem in the philosophy of science. In this context, Popper, Kuhn and Feyerabend’s solution to the problem will be given respectively and their criteria will be applied to homeopathy, aiming to shed some light on the controversy over its scientific status. It then examines homeopathy under the lens of demarcation criteria to conclude that homeopathy is regarded as science by Feyerabend and is considered as pseudoscience (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  21. Why the Demarcation Problem Matters.Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry - 2013 - In Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem.
    Ever since Socrates, philosophers have been in the business of asking ques- tions of the type “What is X?” The point has not always been to actually find out what X is, but rather to explore how we think about X, to bring up to the surface wrong ways of thinking about it, and hopefully in the process to achieve an increasingly better understanding of the matter at hand. In the early part of the twentieth century one of the most (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  22. Les pratiques pseudo-scientifiques.Andrew Lugg - 1983 - Dialogue 22 (2):239-251.
    There is no satisfactory way of distinguishing the parodies of science from the genuine thing. Philosophers tend to think science and pseudoscience differ in kind, but the fact is they differ mostly in degree.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Demarcation without Dogmas.Ilmari Hirvonen & Janne Karisto - 2022 - Theoria 88 (3):701-720.
    This paper reviews how research on the demarcation problem has developed, starting from Popper’s criterion of falsifiability and ending with recent naturalistically oriented approaches. The main differences between traditional and contemporary approaches to the problem are explicated in terms of six postulates called the traditional assumptions. It is argued that all of the assumptions can be dismissed without giving up on the demarcation problem and that doing so might benefit further discussions on pseudoscience. Four present-day research movements on evaluating (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  24. The Fake, the Flimsy, and the Fallacious: Demarcating Arguments in Real Life.Maarten Boudry, Fabio Paglieri & Massimo Pigliucci - 2015 - Argumentation 29 (4):10.1007/s10503-015-9359-1.
    Philosophers of science have given up on the quest for a silver bullet to put an end to all pseudoscience, as such a neat formal criterion to separate good science from its contenders has proven elusive. In the literature on critical thinking and in some philosophical quarters, however, this search for silver bullets lives on in the taxonomies of fallacies. The attractive idea is to have a handy list of abstract definitions or argumentation schemes, on the basis of which (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  25. Věda, pseudověda a paravěda.Filip Tvrdý - 2020 - E-Logos 27 (2):4-17.
    Finding the demarcation criterion for the identification of scientific knowledge is the most important task of normative epistemology. Pseudoscience is not a harmless leisure activity, it can pose a danger to the functioning of liberal democratic societies and the well-being of their citizens. First, there is an outline of how to define science instrumentally without slipping into the detrimental heritage of conceptual essentialism. The second part is dedicated to Popper’s falsification criterion and the objections of its opponents, which eventually (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  26.  70
    Gatekeeping in Science: Lessons from the Case of Psychology and Neuro-Linguistic Programming.Katherine Dormandy & Bruce Grimley - 2024 - Social Epistemology 38 (3):392-412.
    Gatekeeping, or determining membership of your group, is crucial to science: the moniker ‘scientific’ is a stamp of epistemic quality or even authority. But gatekeeping in science is fraught with dangers. Gatekeepers must exclude bad science, science fraud and pseudoscience, while including the disagreeing viewpoints on which science thrives. This is a difficult tightrope, not least because gatekeeping is a human matter and can be influenced by biases such as groupthink. After spelling out these general tensions around gatekeeping in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. Dalla mela di Newton all'Arancia di Kubrick. La scienza spiegata con la letteratura.Marco Salucci (ed.) - 2022 - Reggio Emilia: Thedotcompany edizioni.
    The book covers scientific and philosophical topics by bringing them closer to literature. Some topics are scientific explanation, the concept of cause, rational argumentation, pseudoscience, language, ethics, philosophy of mind, posthumanism, and democracy. Summary Prefazione di Severino Saccardi. Introduzione. Capitolo 1: Le scrivanie di Eddington. 1.1. Il vecchio Qfwfq (I. Calvino. Le cosmicomiche). 1.2. L’assassino invisibile (L.F. Celine, Il dottor Semmelweis). 1.3. Gli gnommeri di Ingravallo (C.E. Gadda, Quer pasticciaccio brutto de via Merulana). 1.4. I sergenti di Napoleone (L. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. The referee’s dilemma. The ethics of scientific communities and game theory.Tomislav Bracanovic - 2002 - Prolegomena 1 (1):55-74.
    This article argues that various deviations from the basic principles of the scientific ethos – primarily the appearance of pseudoscience in scientific communities – can be formulated and explained using specific models of game theory, such as the prisoner’s dilemma and the iterated prisoner’s dilemma. The article indirectly tackles the deontology of scientific work as well, in which it is assumed that there is no room for moral skepticism, let alone moral anti-realism, in the ethics of scientific communities. Namely, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  29. Do extraordinary claims really require extraordinary evidence?Massimo Pigliucci - 2009 - In K. Frazier (ed.), Science Under Siege: Defending Science, Exposing Pseudoscience. Prometheus.
    To what extend does David Hume's argument about miracles inform modern skepticism about pseudoscience?
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  30. Naar een emancipatie van de complottheorie.Massimiliano Simons - 2017 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 3 (79):473-497.
    This article argues that pseudoscience lacks an adequate philosophical analysis. Using conspiracy theories as a case study, it is claimed that such an analysis needs to go beyond a mere epistemological approach. In the first part, it is shown that the existing philosophical literature shares the assumption that conspiracy theories are primarily deficient scientific hypotheses. This claim is contested, because such an approach can only understand what conspiracy theories fail to be, but not what they are and why people (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  31. The demarcation problem: a (belated) response to Laudan.Massimo Pigliucci - 2013 - In Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. pp. 9.
    The “demarcation problem,” the issue of how to separate science from pseu- doscience, has been around since fall 1919—at least according to Karl Pop- per’s (1957) recollection of when he first started thinking about it. In Popper’s mind, the demarcation problem was intimately linked with one of the most vexing issues in philosophy of science, David Hume’s problem of induction (Vickers 2010) and, in particular, Hume’s contention that induction cannot be logically justified by appealing to the fact that “it works,” (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  32. Creencias conspirativas: condiciones psicológicas y sociopolíticas de su formación y prominencia (Conspiracy beliefs: psychological and sociopolitical conditions of their formation and salience).Pietro Montanari - 2022 - Revista de Filosofía 101 (39):211-234.
    The paper focuses on the analysis of conspiracy beliefs and conspiracy theories by taking into consideration some of the major contributions about the topic presently provided by several disciplines. A definition is given that helps illustrate the most prominent features of these beliefs, namely monological bias, logical and conceptual fallacies, dispositional influence and pseudorationality. Other important psychological preconditions are also provided (such as, among others, credulity, hypersensitive agency detection devices and proneness to self-deception), but, as the paper argues, they are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33. An in-depth philosophical critique of Contemporary Western Astrology.Ivan Kelly & D. H. Saklofske - manuscript
    A critique of popular astrology. The critical examination outlines a number of serious concerns with the theory underlying astrology.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. Bilim, sözdebilim ayrımı bağlamında tasarlanan etkinliklerin 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin.Gülşah Atasoy - 2020 - Dissertation,
    Bu çalışmada; bilim, sözdebilim ayrımına yönelik tasarlanan öğretim etkinliklerinin, 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin sözdebilimsel inançlarına ve eleştirel düşünme becerilerine etkisini araştırmak ayrıca hangi bilimsellik ve hatalı bilimsellik ölçütlerine sahip olduklarını belirlemek amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçlar doğrultusunda araştırmanının modeli iç içe karma desen olarak belirlenmiştir. Çalışma, 2018-2019 eğitim öğretim yılının ikinci döneminde, Kocaeli ili Başiskele ilçesinde bulunan bir devlet ortaokulunda gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmanın nicel kısmında bir deney (n=29) ve bir kontrol (n=30) grubu olmak üzere 59 öğrenci, nitel kısmında ise deney grubunda bulunan 29 öğrenci (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. Is knowledge of science associated with higher skepticism of pseudoscientific claims?Matthew Johnson & Massimo Pigliucci - 2004 - American Biology Teacher 66 (8):536-548.
    We live in a world that is increasingly shaped by and bathed in science, with most scientific progress occurring in the past century, and much of it in the past few decades. Yet, several authors have puz- zled over the observation that modern societies are also characterized by a high degree of belief in a variety of pseudoscientific claims that have been thoroughly debunked or otherwise discarded by scientists (Anonymous, 2001; Ede, 2000).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  36. The concepts of modern astrology: A Critique.I. W. Kelly - manuscript
    Abstract -- Most research reviews are concerned with empirical findings. This one takes astrological concepts and principles, the ideas on which astrology is based, and submits them to critical evaluation. It covers recent shifts in astrological ideas, how astrologers avoid dealing with criticism, and the problems associated with (in turn) the fundamental assumptions of astrology, the origins of astrological ideas, modern psychological astrology, astrological world views, astrological symbolism, non-falsifiability, and magical influences. To be plausible astrology needs sound ideas with sound (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. Loki's wager and Laudan's error: on genuine and territorial demarcation.Maarten Boudry - 2013 - In Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. pp. 79--98.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  38. Why Gaia?Massimo Pigliucci - 2014 - Ethics and the Environment 19 (2):117.
    In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Why Gaia?Massimo Pigliucci (bio)The Gaia Hypothesis: Science on a Pagan Planet, Michael Ruse, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013. 272 pages.“The Gaia Hypothesis: Science on a Pagan Planet tells a story that comes out of the 1960s, a story that reflects all of the beliefs and enthusiasms and tensions of that decade.” So begins Michael Ruse’s fascinating, if at times puzzling, exploration of James Lovelock’s famous idea that our (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Robert Saudek’s graphology in the light of Fritz Mauthner’s critique of language.Jakub Mácha - forthcoming - Studies in East European Thought:1-17.
    Robert Saudek, a Czech graphologist, journalist, diplomat, playwright, and novelist, was heavily influenced in his youth by Fritz Mauthner’s critique of language. Saudek later became a pioneer in the field of psychological graphology. In this article, I examine the impact of Mauthner’s critique on Saudek’s work and evaluate whether Saudek’s approach to graphology aligns with Mauthner’s ideas. I argue that, although Saudek’s graphology is rooted in Mauthner’s critique of experimental psychology, there remains room for further development in the field of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. Bilim ve Sözde Bilim: Bilimsel Topluluğun Doğasının Belirlenmesi ve Sözde Bilimin Ayırt Edilmesine Yönelik Sosyal Bir Ölçüt.Alper Bilgehan Yardımcı - 2019 - Kaygı. Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi 18 (2):567-588.
    Bilimin ne olduğunun tespit edilmesi ve bilimi sözde bilimlerden ya da bilimsel olmayan alanlardan ayırt edecek ölçütün ne olması gerektiğine yönelik tartışma, bilim felsefesinde sınır çizme sorunu olarak ele alınmaktadır. Bu makalede, öncelikle söz konusu soruna yönelik geleneksel yaklaşımlar incelenmiş ve ardından bu yaklaşımların bilimsel toplulukların doğasına ilişkin özellikleri göz ardı ettiği ortaya konmuştur. Daha önce yapılan çalışmalar bilimi daha çok önermeler, ifadeler ya da salt epistemik bir sistem olarak ele almakta ve bilimsel akıl yürütmenin biçimi ile bilimsel kuramların özelliklerine (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  41. Creationism as a cultural, not scientific, issue.Massimo Pigliucci - 2007 - In T. Flynn (ed.), The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief. Prometheus.
    Why creationism is an important cultural, but scientifically negligible, phenomenon.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. Definindo Ciência e Pseudociência, para Além da Falseabilidade: A Proposta Ampliada de Hansson.Clarice de Medeiros Chaves Ferreira - 2021 - Anais Do IV Encontro Sul-Brasileiro de Análise Do Comportamento.
    Muitos psicólogos ainda pensam que a maior referência para falar sobre a demarcação de ciência/pseudociência é Popper. Entretanto, as discussões sobre o problema da demarcação não se encerraram com o critério da falseabilidade, e a filosofia teve diversos avanços. Este trabalho tem por objetivo atualizar os estudantes e profissionais de psicologia sobre os avanços no campo da filosofia da ciência, com um enfoque na teoria de Hansson. Para isso, foi consultado o livro “Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem”, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. حاجة العلم إلى الفلسفة في عصر التكنولوجيا Science's need for philosophy in the age of technology.Ismail Salah - 2023 - In Arabs and the philosophical movement today. Beirut, Lebanon: Arab Thought Foundation. pp. 59-64.
    Science was not far from philosophy in ancient thought, but the two were one thing. I do not know whether the ancient philosophers considered themselves the issue of the relationship between them, as the modern and contemporary philosophers did. But the sure thing is that the natural sciences became independent from philosophy in the modern era, and most of the scientific departments in universities were divided into two parts: sciences, literature, and humanities. At the end of the nineteenth century and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44. Metodološke osnove naučnog predvidjanja u istoriji (Methodological grounds for scientific predicting in history).Vladimir Marko - 1989 - Zbornik Matice Srpske Za Drustvene Nauke 89:43-64.
    In the opening lines of this article it is claimed that history is a discipline taking role as part of unique body of science. The concept of scientific rationality is presented as the criterion of demarcation between science and pseudoscience. From this statement as a starting point, it follows that the methodological grounds for scientific predictions are common for all scientific disciplines. Different aspects of scientific predicting are critically examined: thesis of symmetry, determinism and predictability, indeterminism and predictability, reflexivity (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. Střet kontinentální a analytické filozofie.Filip Tvrdý - 2017 - Filosofie Dnes 8 (2):3-19.
    The article focuses on the history of the conflict between analytic and continental tradition, which dominated the philosophy of the 20th century. Although both traditions originated from the same intellectual environment and were heavily influenced by Neo-Kantianism, their mutual lack of understanding progressed over time and, on several occasions, the situation grew into open hostility. The article describes the ten most serious conflicts: Russell vs. Bergson, Schlick vs. Husserl, Carnap vs. Heidegger, Ryle vs. Heidegger, Popper's critique of pseudoscience, conference (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. Welche Kompetenz hat Wissenschaftsphilosophie?.Kay Herrmann - 2012 - Universitätsverlag Chemnitz.
    Stephen Hawking claims: Philosophy is dead! Natural scientists use terms like 'natural law', 'matter', 'nature' and 'theories'. Often these terms are taken for granted without reflection. The task of philosophy of science as a metatheory of science is to clarify these terms. In doing so, philosophy of science is confronted with epistemological, ontological and metaphysical questions. But it also deals with questions such as "How do we define the boundaries between different scientific disciplines?" or "How do we distinguish science from (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47. Quantum Physics: an overview of a weird world: A primer on the conceptual foundations of quantum physics.Marco Masi - 2019 - Indy Edition.
    This is the first book in a two-volume series. The present volume introduces the basics of the conceptual foundations of quantum physics. It appeared first as a series of video lectures on the online learning platform Udemy.]There is probably no science that is as confusing as quantum theory. There's so much misleading information on the subject that for most people it is very difficult to separate science facts from pseudoscience. The goal of this book is to make you able (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48. The Salem Region: Two Mindsets about Science.John S. Wilkins - 2013 - In Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. pp. 397.
    This chapter distinguishes between two mindsets about science—the deductivist mindset and inductivist mindset—and explores the cognitive styles relating to authority and tradition in both science and pseudoscience. The deductivist tends to see problems as questions to be resolved by deduction from known theory or principle. The inductivist sees problems as questions to be resolved by discovery. Those leaning towards a deductivist mindset may find results that conflict with prior theoretical commitments unacceptable. The deductivist tends to be a cognitive conservative, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49. A review on a peer review.Andrej Poleev - 2016 - Enzymes 14.
    Peer review is an opportunity to perform an unlawful censorship which ensures that no apostate notion ever get published in mainstream journals. Or such peer review censorship is an opportunity to steal any content and to claim afterward the priority of first publication. And last but not least, the peer review is an academic tool to promote the mainstream pseudoscience.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  50. The evolution-creation wars: why teaching more science just is not enough.Massimo Pigliucci - 2007 - McGill Journal of Education 42 (2):285-306.
    The creation-evolution “controversy” has been with us for more than a century. Here I argue that merely teaching more science will probably not improve the situation; we need to understand the controversy as part of a broader problem with public acceptance of pseudoscience, and respond by teaching how science works as a method. Critical thinking is difficult to teach, but educators can rely on increasing evidence from neurobiology about how the brain learns, or fails to.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
1 — 50 / 77