Features of pseudoscience
The main difference between pseudoscience and science is the uncritical use of new uncritical methods, questionable and often erroneous data and information, as well as the denial of the possibility of denial, while science is based on facts (verified information), verifiable methods and is constantly evolving, parting with the refuted theories and offering new ones.
Here is what Vitaly Ginzburg, the Nobel Prize winner in physics of 2003 says: "False science is all sorts of constructions, scientific hypotheses and so on, which contradict the firmly established scientific facts.
For example, the nature of warmth. We now know that heat is a measure of the chaotic movement of molecules. But this was not once known, and there were other theories, including the theory of heat, which is that there is some kind of liquid that overflows and transfers heat. And then it was not a pseudoscience, that's what I want to emphasize. But if a man with the theory of heat comes to you now, it is an ignoramus or a crook.
False science is something that is "obviously wrong. There are many other interpretations that reveal the essence of the definition of pseudoscience (the term "pseudoscience" and identical synonyms will be used later), but it is equally important to mention its leading characteristics.
Thus, pseudoscientific theory is characterized by the following characteristics:
- ignoring or distorting facts known to the author of the theory, but contradicting his constructions;
- non-falsifiability, i.e. impossibility to carry out an experiment (at least mental), one of the principally possible results of which would contradict this theory;
- Refusing to reconcile theoretical calculations with the results of observations, if possible, and replacing checks with appeals to "intuition", "common sense" or "authority opinion";
- The use of unreliable data (i.e., data not confirmed by a number of independent experiments (researchers) or within the limits of measurement errors), or unproven positions, or data resulting from computational errors as a basis for the theory.
- Introduction to the publication or discussion of scientific work of political and religious attitudes.
In other words, pseudoscience ignores the most important elements of scientific method - experimental checking and correction of errors.
The absence of this feedback deprives the pseudoscience of connection with the object of research and turns it into an uncontrollable process, highly susceptible to the accumulation of errors.
The following are also optional but common features of pseudoscientific theories:
- The theory is created by one person or a small group of people, as a rule, not specialists in the field of what the theory says, or in related fields. - There are no publications in peer-reviewed scientific periodicals.
- The theory is uniquely universal - it claims to explain literally the whole universe (or, as in the case of psychological theories, the behavior of any person in any circumstances), and a huge number of conclusions are drawn from the basic provisions, and the correctness of conclusions is not checked in practice.
- The author actively uses theory for personal business: sells literature on theory, provides paid services based on it, advertises and conducts paid "courses", "trainings", "seminars" on theory and its application, one way or another propagandizes theory among non-specialists as a highly effective means to achieve success and improve life (in general or in some aspects).
- In articles, books, advertising materials, the author presents the theory as an absolutely proven and undoubted truth, regardless of how widespread it is and the degree of trust in it by specialists.
To be continued i the next part https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5d9330af8600e100b06bbabe/pseudoscience-pros-and-cons-part-3-5d94f72d2beb4900ac81c008