Advertisement
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: A Dictionary of Forensic Science Suzanne Bell, 2012-02-09 This new dictionary covers a wide range of terms used in the field of forensic science, touching on related disciplines such as chemistry, biology, and anthropology. Case examples, figures, and photographs make it the ideal reference for students and practitioners of forensic science, as well as those with an interest in forensic science. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Elements of Cure Tracy D. Kolenchuk, 2019-01-02 The Elements of Cure articulates the basic elements of illness, cause, and cure. It describes how these elements are combined to create complex and compound illnesses, and how those illnesses are cured with complex and compound cures. The distinctions between illnesses and cases of disease, chronic disease, disorder, medical condition, and disability is clearly defined to aid in finding cures and recognizing cures when they are found. The Elements of Cure can be used as a theoretical foundation to deconstruct any case of a disease into a set of illnesses and to begin and track the cure process. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Scientific Attitude Lee McIntyre, 2019-05-07 An argument that what makes science distinctive is its emphasis on evidence and scientists' willingness to change theories on the basis of new evidence. Attacks on science have become commonplace. Claims that climate change isn't settled science, that evolution is “only a theory,” and that scientists are conspiring to keep the truth about vaccines from the public are staples of some politicians' rhetorical repertoire. Defenders of science often point to its discoveries (penicillin! relativity!) without explaining exactly why scientific claims are superior. In this book, Lee McIntyre argues that what distinguishes science from its rivals is what he calls “the scientific attitude”—caring about evidence and being willing to change theories on the basis of new evidence. The history of science is littered with theories that were scientific but turned out to be wrong; the scientific attitude reveals why even a failed theory can help us to understand what is special about science. McIntyre offers examples that illustrate both scientific success (a reduction in childbed fever in the nineteenth century) and failure (the flawed “discovery” of cold fusion in the twentieth century). He describes the transformation of medicine from a practice based largely on hunches into a science based on evidence; considers scientific fraud; examines the positions of ideology-driven denialists, pseudoscientists, and “skeptics” who reject scientific findings; and argues that social science, no less than natural science, should embrace the scientific attitude. McIntyre argues that the scientific attitude—the grounding of science in evidence—offers a uniquely powerful tool in the defense of science. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Great Mental Models, Volume 1 Shane Parrish, Rhiannon Beaubien, 2024-10-15 Discover the essential thinking tools you’ve been missing with The Great Mental Models series by Shane Parrish, New York Times bestselling author and the mind behind the acclaimed Farnam Street blog and “The Knowledge Project” podcast. This first book in the series is your guide to learning the crucial thinking tools nobody ever taught you. Time and time again, great thinkers such as Charlie Munger and Warren Buffett have credited their success to mental models–representations of how something works that can scale onto other fields. Mastering a small number of mental models enables you to rapidly grasp new information, identify patterns others miss, and avoid the common mistakes that hold people back. The Great Mental Models: Volume 1, General Thinking Concepts shows you how making a few tiny changes in the way you think can deliver big results. Drawing on examples from history, business, art, and science, this book details nine of the most versatile, all-purpose mental models you can use right away to improve your decision making and productivity. This book will teach you how to: Avoid blind spots when looking at problems. Find non-obvious solutions. Anticipate and achieve desired outcomes. Play to your strengths, avoid your weaknesses, … and more. The Great Mental Models series demystifies once elusive concepts and illuminates rich knowledge that traditional education overlooks. This series is the most comprehensive and accessible guide on using mental models to better understand our world, solve problems, and gain an advantage. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Pseudoscience Allison B. Kaufman, James C. Kaufman, 2019-03-12 Case studies, personal accounts, and analysis show how to recognize and combat pseudoscience in a post-truth world. In a post-truth, fake news world, we are particularly susceptible to the claims of pseudoscience. When emotions and opinions are more widely disseminated than scientific findings, and self-proclaimed experts get their expertise from Google, how can the average person distinguish real science from fake? This book examines pseudoscience from a variety of perspectives, through case studies, analysis, and personal accounts that show how to recognize pseudoscience, why it is so widely accepted, and how to advocate for real science. Contributors examine the basics of pseudoscience, including issues of cognitive bias; the costs of pseudoscience, with accounts of naturopathy and logical fallacies in the anti-vaccination movement; perceptions of scientific soundness; the mainstream presence of “integrative medicine,” hypnosis, and parapsychology; and the use of case studies and new media in science advocacy. Contributors David Ball, Paul Joseph Barnett, Jeffrey Beall, Mark Benisz, Fernando Blanco, Ron Dumont, Stacy Ellenberg, Kevin M. Folta, Christopher French, Ashwin Gautam, Dennis M. Gorman, David H. Gorski, David K. Hecht, Britt Marie Hermes, Clyde F. Herreid, Jonathan Howard, Seth C. Kalichman, Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair, Arnold Kozak, Scott O. Lilienfeld, Emilio Lobato, Steven Lynn, Adam Marcus, Helena Matute, Ivan Oransky, Chad Orzel, Dorit Reiss, Ellen Beate Hansen Sandseter, Kavin Senapathy, Dean Keith Simonton, Indre Viskontas, John O. Willis, Corrine Zimmerman |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: On the Fringe Michael D. Gordin, 2021 Pseudoscience is not a real thing. The term is a negative category, always ascribed to somebody else's beliefs, not to characterize a doctrine one holds dear oneself. People who espouse fringe ideas never think of themselves as pseudoscientists; they think they are following the correct scientific doctrine, even if it is not mainstream. In that sense, there is no such thing as pseudoscience, just disagreements about what the right science is. This is a familiar phenomenon. No believer ever thinks she is a heretic, for example, or an artist that he produces bad art. Those are attacks presented by opponents. Yet pseudoscience is also real. The term of abuse is used quite frequently, sometimes even about ideas that are at the core of the scientific mainstream, and those labels have consequences. If the reputation of pseudoscience solidifies, then it is very hard for a doctrine to shed the bad reputation. The outcome is plenty of scorn and no legitimacy (or funding) to investigate one's theories. In this, pseudoscience is a lot like heresy: if the label sticks, persecution follows-- |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Philosophy of Pseudoscience Massimo Pigliucci, Maarten Boudry, 2013-08-16 “A remarkable contribution to one of the most vexing problems in science: the ‘demarcation’ problem, or how to distinguish science from nonscience.” —Francisco J. Ayala, author of Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion What sets the practice of rigorously tested, sound science apart from pseudoscience? In this volume, the contributors seek to answer this question, known to philosophers of science as “the demarcation problem.” This issue has a long history in philosophy, stretching as far back as the early twentieth century and the work of Karl Popper. But by the late 1980s, scholars in the field began to treat the demarcation problem as impossible to solve and futile to ponder. However, the essays that Massimo Pigliucci and Maarten Boudry have assembled in this volume make a rousing case for the unequivocal importance of reflecting on the separation between pseudoscience and sound science. Moreover, the demarcation problem is not a purely theoretical dilemma of mere academic interest: it affects parents’ decisions to vaccinate children and governments’ willingness to adopt policies that prevent climate change. Pseudoscience often mimics science, using the superficial language and trappings of actual scientific research to seem more respectable. Even a well-informed public can be taken in by such questionable theories dressed up as science. Pseudoscientific beliefs compete with sound science on the health pages of newspapers for media coverage and in laboratories for research funding. Now more than ever the ability to separate genuine scientific findings from spurious ones is vital, and The Philosophy of Pseudoscience provides ground for philosophers, sociologists, historians, and laypeople to make decisions about what science is or isn’t. “A manual to overcome our natural cognitive biases.” —Corriere della Sera (Italy) |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, First Edition Scott O. Lilienfeld, Steven Jay Lynn, Jeffrey M. Lohr, 2012-12-18 This is the first major text designed to help professionals and students evaluate the merits of popular yet controversial practices in clinical psychology, differentiating those that can stand up to the rigors of science from those that cannot. Leading researchers review widely used therapies for alcoholism, infantile autism, ADHD, and posttraumatic stress disorder; herbal remedies for depression and anxiety; suggestive techniques for memory recovery; and self-help models. Other topics covered include issues surrounding psychological expert testimony, the uses of projective assessment techniques, and unanswered questions about dissociative identity disorder. Providing knowledge to guide truly accountable mental health practice, the volume also imparts critical skills for designing and evaluating psychological research programs. It is ideal for use in advanced undergraduate- and graduate-level courses in clinical psychology, psychotherapy, and evidence-based practice. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Good Science, Bad Science, Pseudoscience, and Just Plain Bunk Peter Daempfle, 2013 We are constantly bombarded with breaking scientific news in the media, but we are almost never provided with enough information to assess the truth of these claims. Does drinking coffee really cause cancer? Does bisphenol-A in our tin can linings really cause reproductive damage? Good Science, Bad Science, Pseudoscience, and Just Plain Bunk teaches readers how to think like a scientist to question claims like these more critically. Peter A. Daempfle introduces readers to the basics of scientific inquiry, defining what science is and how it can be misused. Through provocative real-world examples, the book helps readers acquire the tools needed to distinguish scientific truth from myth. The book celebrates science and its role in society while building scientific literacy. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Pseudoscience and Science Fiction Andrew May, 2016-09-13 Aliens, flying saucers, ESP, the Bermuda Triangle, antigravity ... are we talking about science fiction or pseudoscience? Sometimes it is difficult to tell the difference. Both pseudoscience and science fiction (SF) are creative endeavours that have little in common with academic science, beyond the superficial trappings of jargon and subject matter. The most obvious difference between the two is that pseudoscience is presented as fact, not fiction. Yet like SF, and unlike real science, pseudoscience is driven by a desire to please an audience – in this case, people who “want to believe”. This has led to significant cross-fertilization between the two disciplines. SF authors often draw on “real” pseudoscientific theories to add verisimilitude to their stories, while on other occasions pseudoscience takes its cue from SF – the symbiotic relationship between ufology and Hollywood being a prime example of this. This engagingly written, well researched and richly illustrated text explores a wide range of intriguing similarities and differences between pseudoscience and the fictional science found in SF. Andrew May has a degree in Natural Sciences from Cambridge University and a PhD in astrophysics from Manchester University. After many years in academia and the private sector, he now works as a freelance writer and scientific consultant. He has written pocket biographies of Newton and Einstein, as well as contributing to a number of popular science books. He has a lifelong interest in science fiction, and has had several articles published in Fortean Times magazine |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Critical Thinking, Science, and Pseudoscience Caleb W. Lack, PhD, Jacques Rousseau, MA, 2016-03-08 This unique text for undergraduate courses teaches students to apply critical thinking skills across all academic disciplines by examining popular pseudoscientific claims through a multidisciplinary lens. Rather than merely focusing on critical thinking grounded in philosophy and psychology, the text incorporates the perspectives of biology, physics, medicine, and other disciplines to reinforce different categories of rational explanation. The book is also distinguished by its respectful approach to individuals whose ideas are, according to the authors, deeply flawed. Accessible and engaging, it describes what critical thinking is, why it is important, and how to learn and apply skillsóusing scientific methods--that promote it. The text also examines why critical thinking can be difficult to engage in and explores the psychological and social reasons why people are drawn to and find credence in extraordinary claims. From alien abductions and psychic phenomena to strange creatures and unsupported alternative medical treatments, the text uses examples from a wide range of pseudoscience fields and brings evidence from diverse disciplines to critically examine these erroneous claims. Particularly timely is the text's examination of how, using the narrative of today's culture wars, religion and culture impact science. The authors focus on how the human brain, rife with natural biases, does not process information in a rational fashion, and the social factors that prevent individuals from gaining an unbiased, critical perspective on information. Authored by a psychologist and a philosopher who have extensive experience teaching and writing on critical thinking and skeptical inquiry, this work will help students to strengthen their skills in reasoning and debate, become intelligent consumers of research, and make well-informed choices as citizens. Key Features: Addresses the foundations of critical thinking and how to apply it through the popular activity of examining pseudoscience Explains why humans are vulnerable to pseudoscientific claims and how critical thinking can overcome fallacies and biases Reinforces critical thinking through multidisciplinary analyses of pseudoscience Examines how religion and culture impact science Enlightens using an engaging, entertaining approach Written by experienced and innovative scholar/educators well known in the skeptic community Features teaching resources including an Instructor's Guide and Powepoint slides |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Conjectures and Refutations Karl Popper, 2014-05-01 Conjectures and Refutations is one of Karl Popper's most wide-ranging and popular works, notable not only for its acute insight into the way scientific knowledge grows, but also for applying those insights to politics and to history. It provides one of the clearest and most accessible statements of the fundamental idea that guided his work: not only our knowledge, but our aims and our standards, grow through an unending process of trial and error. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Philosophy of Science for Scientists Lars-Göran Johansson, 2015-12-17 This textbook offers an introduction to the philosophy of science. It helps undergraduate students from the natural, the human and social sciences to gain an understanding of what science is, how it has developed, what its core traits are, how to distinguish between science and pseudo-science and to discover what a scientific attitude is. It argues against the common assumption that there is fundamental difference between natural and human science, with natural science being concerned with testing hypotheses and discovering natural laws, and the aim of human and some social sciences being to understand the meanings of individual and social group actions. Instead examines the similarities between the sciences and shows how the testing of hypotheses and doing interpretation/hermeneutics are similar activities. The book makes clear that lessons from natural scientists are relevant to students and scholars within the social and human sciences, and vice versa. It teaches its readers how to effectively demarcate between science and pseudo-science and sets criteria for true scientific thinking. Divided into three parts, the book first examines the question What is Science? It describes the evolution of science, defines knowledge, and explains the use of and need for hypotheses and hypothesis testing. The second half of part I deals with scientific data and observation, qualitative data and methods, and ends with a discussion of theories on the development of science. Part II offers philosophical reflections on four of the most important con cepts in science: causes, explanations, laws and models. Part III presents discussions on philosophy of mind, the relation between mind and body, value-free and value-related science, and reflections on actual trends in science. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Demon-Haunted World Carl Sagan, 2011-07-06 A prescient warning of a future we now inhabit, where fake news stories and Internet conspiracy theories play to a disaffected American populace “A glorious book . . . A spirited defense of science . . . From the first page to the last, this book is a manifesto for clear thought.”—Los Angeles Times How can we make intelligent decisions about our increasingly technology-driven lives if we don’t understand the difference between the myths of pseudoscience and the testable hypotheses of science? Pulitzer Prize-winning author and distinguished astronomer Carl Sagan argues that scientific thinking is critical not only to the pursuit of truth but to the very well-being of our democratic institutions. Casting a wide net through history and culture, Sagan examines and authoritatively debunks such celebrated fallacies of the past as witchcraft, faith healing, demons, and UFOs. And yet, disturbingly, in today's so-called information age, pseudoscience is burgeoning with stories of alien abduction, channeling past lives, and communal hallucinations commanding growing attention and respect. As Sagan demonstrates with lucid eloquence, the siren song of unreason is not just a cultural wrong turn but a dangerous plunge into darkness that threatens our most basic freedoms. Praise for The Demon-Haunted World “Powerful . . . A stirring defense of informed rationality. . . Rich in surprising information and beautiful writing.”—The Washington Post Book World “Compelling.”—USA Today “A clear vision of what good science means and why it makes a difference. . . . A testimonial to the power of science and a warning of the dangers of unrestrained credulity.”—The Sciences “Passionate.”—San Francisco Examiner-Chronicle |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Science of Science Communication III National Academy of Sciences, 2018-05-01 Successful scientists must be effective communicators within their professions. Without those skills, they could not write papers and funding proposals, give talks and field questions, or teach classes and mentor students. However, communicating with audiences outside their profession - people who may not share scientists' interests, technical background, cultural assumptions, and modes of expression - presents different challenges and requires additional skills. Communication about science in political or social settings differs from discourse within a scientific discipline. Not only are scientists just one of many stakeholders vying for access to the public agenda, but the political debates surrounding science and its applications may sometimes confront scientists with unfamiliar and uncomfortable discussions involving religious values, partisan interests, and even the trustworthiness of science. The Science of Science Communication III: Inspiring Novel Collaborations and Building Capacity summarizes the presentations and discussions from a Sackler Colloquium convened in November 2017. This event used Communicating Science Effectively as a framework for examining how one might apply its lessons to research and practice. It considered opportunities for creating and applying the science along with the barriers to doing so, such as the incentive systems in academic institutions and the perils of communicating science in polarized environments. Special attention was given to the organization and infrastructure necessary for building capacity in science communication. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Solid State Insurrection Joseph D. Martin, 2019-08-27 Solid state physics, the study of the physical properties of solid matter, was the most populous subfield of Cold War American physics. Despite prolific contributions to consumer and medical technology, such as the transistor and magnetic resonance imaging, it garnered less professional prestige and public attention than nuclear and particle physics. Solid State Insurrection argues that solid state physics was essential to securing the vast social, political, and financial capital Cold War physics enjoyed in the twentieth century. Solid state’s technological bent, and its challenge to the “pure science” ideal many physicists cherished, helped physics as a whole respond more readily to Cold War social, political, and economic pressures. Its research kept physics economically and technologically relevant, sustaining its cultural standing and policy influence long after the sheen of the Manhattan Project had faded. With this book, Joseph D. Martin brings a new perspective to some of the most enduring questions about the role of physics in American history. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Sexing the Brain Lesley J. Rogers, 2001 How much of sexual diversity is the result of nature versus nurture? Prevailing theories today lean heavily toward nature. Now a leading researcher in neuroscience and animal behavior shows how, in recent history, scientific claims about sex and gender differences have reflected the culture of the time. Although the conviction that genetics can explain everything is now widespread, the author demonstrates the interaction of culture and environment in the formation of behavioral traits and so provides an important corrective to popular notions of reductionism. Starting with a summary of sex and gender studies, Rogers explains the error of sex biasing, especially the once-assumed inferiority of women. She then addresses several modern studies and investigations, some of which assert that sex and gender differences are the product of genetic inheritance and hormones. Rogers uses laboratory evidence from studies of animals that help illustrate the biologically fluid properties of sex and gender. Sexing the Brain addresses a variety of topical questions: Are there sex differences in how we think and feel? Is language processed in different parts of the brain in men and women? Do social influences have a stronger influence on sexual behavior than sex hormone levels? Rogers concludes that our biology does not bind us to remain the same.... We have the ability to change, and the future of sex differences belongs to us. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Pseudoscience Wars Michael D. Gordin, 2012-09-17 Properly analyzed, the collective mythological and religious writings of humanity reveal that around 1500 BC, a comet swept perilously close to Earth, triggering widespread natural disasters and threatening the destruction of all life before settling into solar orbit as Venus, our nearest planetary neighbor. Sound implausible? Well, from 1950 until the late 1970s, a huge number of people begged to differ, as they devoured Immanuel Velikovsky’s major best-seller, Worlds in Collision, insisting that perhaps this polymathic thinker held the key to a new science and a new history. Scientists, on the other hand, assaulted Velikovsky’s book, his followers, and his press mercilessly from the get-go. In The Pseudoscience Wars, Michael D. Gordin resurrects the largely forgotten figure of Velikovsky and uses his strange career and surprisingly influential writings to explore the changing definitions of the line that separates legitimate scientific inquiry from what is deemed bunk, and to show how vital this question remains to us today. Drawing on a wealth of previously unpublished material from Velikovsky’s personal archives, Gordin presents a behind-the-scenes history of the writer’s career, from his initial burst of success through his growing influence on the counterculture, heated public battles with such luminaries as Carl Sagan, and eventual eclipse. Along the way, he offers fascinating glimpses into the histories and effects of other fringe doctrines, including creationism, Lysenkoism, parapsychology, and more—all of which have surprising connections to Velikovsky’s theories. Science today is hardly universally secure, and scientists seem themselves beset by critics, denialists, and those they label “pseudoscientists”—as seen all too clearly in battles over evolution and climate change. The Pseudoscience Wars simultaneously reveals the surprising Cold War roots of our contemporary dilemma and points readers to a different approach to drawing the line between knowledge and nonsense. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science and Pseudoscience in Social Work Practice Bruce A. Thyer, PhD, LCSW, BCBA-D, Monica G. Pignotti, PhD, LMSW, 2015-05-15 Science is a way of thinking about and investigating the accuracy of assumptions about the world. It is a process for solving problems in which we learn from our mistakes. Social work has a long history of social reform and helping efforts. Let us continue this by paying attention to the important message of this book. --Eileen Gambrill, PhD, School of Social Welfare University of California at Berkeley (From the Foreword) Although many psychosocial interventions used in social work practice have strong research evidence supporting their efficacy, a surprising number do not, potentially resulting in harmful outcomes. In this book, the authors cast a critical eye on the reality of commonly used scientific and pseudoscientific practices in social work today. Stressing the need for separating research-based practices from those not supported by adequate levels of evidence, they examine the scientific and pseudoscientific bases for popular social work interventions used in a variety of treatment settings. The text examines the misuse of legitimate research and describes how social work education training can and should discourage pseudoscience. The concluding chapter describes pathways through which social work practice can become more firmly grounded in contemporary scientific research. This engaging book is intended for courses in critical thinking and evidence-based practice and is a valuable resource for all social work students and practitioners. Key Features: Promotes critical thinking regarding the evidence-based research--or lack thereof--behind a variety of social work interventions Written by renowned social work educators Addresses the history and characteristics of pseudoscience Examines pseudoscience practices in assessment and work with children, adolescents, adults, and individuals with developmental difficulties |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Laws of Scientific Change Hakob Barseghyan, 2015-08-17 This book systematically creates a general descriptive theory of scientific change that explains the mechanics of changes in both scientific theories and the methods of their assessment. It was once believed that, while scientific theories change through time, their change itself is governed by a fixed method of science. Nowadays we know that there is no such thing as an unchangeable method of science; the criteria employed by scientists in theory evaluation also change through time. But if that is so, how and why do theories and methods change? Are there any general laws that govern this process, or is the choice of theories and methods completely arbitrary and random? Contrary to the widespread opinion, the book argues that scientific change is indeed a law-governed process and that there can be a general descriptive theory of scientific change. It does so by first presenting meta-theoretical issues, divided into chapters on the scope, possibility and assessment of theory of scientific change. It then builds a theory about the general laws that govern the process of scientific change, and goes into detail about the axioms and theorems of the theory. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science Versus Pseudoscience Nathan Aaseng, 1994 Tells how to determine what is science, and looks at areas of conflict between science and pseudoscience, including the mind, the body, creation science, and astrology |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science and Earth History Arthur Newell Strahler, 1999 In this comprehensive treatment of the ongoing conflict between creationists and evolutionary scientists, well-known geomorphologist Arthur Strahler carefully examines creationists' claims of scientific evidence for the six-day divine creation of the universe, followed by the catastrophic flood of Noah, as claimed in Genesis. The creationists' arguments are examined and evaluated against the findings of mainstream science in the fields of cosmology, astronomy, geophysics, geology, paleontology, and evolutionary biology. Updated with a new preface and responses to recent attacks on evolutionary theory, Science and Earth History can serve as both a popular overview of earth history and as a scholarly anecdote to the fictions of creationism once again finding their way into classrooms and universities. Strahler illuminates the controversy by reviewing the philosophy, methodology, and sociology of empirical science, as contrasted with the belief systems of religion and pseudoscience. The author also includes lucid criteria for distinguishing science from pseudoscience, and reviews the great discoveries and developments in science that point to the evolution of life over the earth's three-billion-year history. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Skeptic Michael Shermer, 2016-01-12 Collected essays from bestselling author Michael Shermer's celebrated columns in Scientific American For fifteen years, bestselling author Michael Shermer has written a column in Scientific American magazine that synthesizes scientific concepts and theory for a general audience. His trademark combination of deep scientific understanding and entertaining writing style has thrilled his huge and devoted audience for years. Now, in Skeptic, seventy-five of these columns are available together for the first time; a welcome addition for his fans and a stimulating introduction for new readers. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Healthcare and Biomedical Technology in the 21st Century George R. Baran, Mohammad F. Kiani, Solomon Praveen Samuel, 2013-10-05 Healthcare and Biotechnology in the 21st Century: Concepts and Case Studies introduces students not pursuing degrees in science or engineering to the remarkable new applications of technology now available to physicians and their patients and discusses how these technologies are evolving to permit new treatments and procedures. The book also elucidates the societal and ethical impacts of advances in medical technology, such as extending life and end of life decisions, the role of genetic testing, confidentiality, costs of health care delivery, scrutiny of scientific claims, and provides background on the engineering approach in healthcare and the scientific method as a guiding principle. This concise, highly relevant text enables faculty to offer a substantive course for students from non-scientific backgrounds that will empower them to make more informed decisions about their healthcare by significantly enhancing their understanding of these technological advancements. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science and Unreason Daisie Radner, Michael Radner, 1982 |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Computational Philosophy of Science Paul Thagard, 1988 By applying research in artificial intelligence to problems in the philosophy of science, Paul Thagard develops an exciting new approach to the study of scientific reasoning. This approach uses computational ideas to shed light on how scientific theories are discovered, evaluated, and used in explanations. Thagard describes a detailed computational model of problem solving and discovery that provides a conceptually rich yet rigorous alternative to accounts of scientific knowledge based on formal logic, and he uses it to illuminate such topics as the nature of concepts, hypothesis formation, analogy, and theory justification. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, Second Edition Scott O. Lilienfeld, Steven Jay Lynn, Jeffrey M. Lohr, 2014-10-13 This valued resource helps practitioners and students evaluate the merits of popular yet controversial practices in clinical psychology and allied fields, and base treatment decisions on the best available research. Leading authorities review widely used therapies for a range of child, adolescent, and adult disorders, differentiating between those that can stand up to the rigors of science and those that cannot. Questionable assessment and diagnostic techniques and self-help models are also examined. The volume provides essential skills for thinking critically as a practitioner, evaluating the validity of scientific claims, and steering clear of treatments that are ineffective or even harmful. New to This Edition *Reflects the significant growth of evidence-based practices in the last decade. *Updated throughout with the latest treatment research. *Chapter on attachment therapy. *Chapter on controversial interventions for child and adolescent antisocial behavior. *Addresses changes in DSM-5. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Theory and Reality Peter Godfrey-Smith, 2021-07-16 How does science work? Does it tell us what the world is “really” like? What makes it different from other ways of understanding the universe? In Theory and Reality, Peter Godfrey-Smith addresses these questions by taking the reader on a grand tour of more than a hundred years of debate about science. The result is a completely accessible introduction to the main themes of the philosophy of science. Examples and asides engage the beginning student, a glossary of terms explains key concepts, and suggestions for further reading are included at the end of each chapter. Like no other text in this field, Theory and Reality combines a survey of recent history of the philosophy of science with current key debates that any beginning scholar or critical reader can follow. The second edition is thoroughly updated and expanded by the author with a new chapter on truth, simplicity, and models in science. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Science Paul Humphreys, 2016-08-04 This handbook provides both an overview of state-of-the-art scholarship in philosophy of science, as well as a guide to new directions in the discipline. Section I contains broad overviews of the main lines of research and the state of established knowledge in six principal areas of the discipline, including computational, physical, biological, psychological and social sciences, as well as general philosophy of science. Section II covers what are considered to be the traditional topics in the philosophy of science, such as causation, probability, models, ethics and values, and explanation. Section III identifies new areas of investigation that show promise of becoming important areas of research, including the philosophy of astronomy and astrophysics, data, complexity theory, neuroscience, simulations, post-Kuhnian philosophy, post-empiricist epistemology, and emergence. Most chapters are accessible to scientifically educated non-philosophers as well as to professional philosophers, and the contributors - all leading researchers in their field -- bring diverse perspectives from the North American, European, and Australasian research communities. This volume is an essential resource for scholars and students. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Nonsense on Stilts Massimo Pigliucci, 2010-05-15 Recent polls suggest that fewer than 40 percent of Americans believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution, despite it being one of science’s best-established findings. More and more parents are refusing to vaccinate their children for fear it causes autism, though this link can been consistently disproved. And about 40 percent of Americans believe that the threat of global warming is exaggerated, despite near consensus in the scientific community that manmade climate change is real. Why do people believe bunk? And what causes them to embrace such pseudoscientific beliefs and practices? Noted skeptic Massimo Pigliucci sets out to separate the fact from the fantasy in this entertaining exploration of the nature of science, the borderlands of fringe science, and—borrowing a famous phrase from philosopher Jeremy Bentham—the nonsense on stilts. Presenting case studies on a number of controversial topics, Pigliucci cuts through the ambiguity surrounding science to look more closely at how science is conducted, how it is disseminated, how it is interpreted, and what it means to our society. The result is in many ways a “taxonomy of bunk” that explores the intersection of science and culture at large. No one—not the public intellectuals in the culture wars between defenders and detractors of science nor the believers of pseudoscience themselves—is spared Pigliucci’s incisive analysis. In the end, Nonsense on Stilts is a timely reminder of the need to maintain a line between expertise and assumption. Broad in scope and implication, it is also ultimately a captivating guide for the intelligent citizen who wishes to make up her own mind while navigating the perilous debates that will affect the future of our planet. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science Communication Annette Leßmöllmann, Marcelo Dascal, Thomas Gloning, 2019-12-16 The volume gives a multi-perspective overview of scholarly and science communication, exploring its diverse functions, modalities, interactional structures, and dynamics in a rapidly changing world. In addition, it provides a guide to current research approaches and traditions on communication in many disciplines, including the humanities, technology, social and natural sciences, and on forms of communication with a wide range of audiences. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Electric Universe Wallace Thornhill, David Talbott, 2007 |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Knowledge Machine: How Irrationality Created Modern Science Michael Strevens, 2020-10-13 “The Knowledge Machine is the most stunningly illuminating book of the last several decades regarding the all-important scientific enterprise.” —Rebecca Newberger Goldstein, author of Plato at the Googleplex A paradigm-shifting work, The Knowledge Machine revolutionizes our understanding of the origins and structure of science. • Why is science so powerful? • Why did it take so long—two thousand years after the invention of philosophy and mathematics—for the human race to start using science to learn the secrets of the universe? In a groundbreaking work that blends science, philosophy, and history, leading philosopher of science Michael Strevens answers these challenging questions, showing how science came about only once thinkers stumbled upon the astonishing idea that scientific breakthroughs could be accomplished by breaking the rules of logical argument. Like such classic works as Karl Popper’s The Logic of Scientific Discovery and Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The Knowledge Machine grapples with the meaning and origins of science, using a plethora of vivid historical examples to demonstrate that scientists willfully ignore religion, theoretical beauty, and even philosophy to embrace a constricted code of argument whose very narrowness channels unprecedented energy into empirical observation and experimentation. Strevens calls this scientific code the iron rule of explanation, and reveals the way in which the rule, precisely because it is unreasonably close-minded, overcomes individual prejudices to lead humanity inexorably toward the secrets of nature. “With a mixture of philosophical and historical argument, and written in an engrossing style” (Alan Ryan), The Knowledge Machine provides captivating portraits of some of the greatest luminaries in science’s history, including Isaac Newton, the chief architect of modern science and its foundational theories of motion and gravitation; William Whewell, perhaps the greatest philosopher-scientist of the early nineteenth century; and Murray Gell-Mann, discoverer of the quark. Today, Strevens argues, in the face of threats from a changing climate and global pandemics, the idiosyncratic but highly effective scientific knowledge machine must be protected from politicians, commercial interests, and even scientists themselves who seek to open it up, to make it less narrow and more rational—and thus to undermine its devotedly empirical search for truth. Rich with illuminating and often delightfully quirky illustrations, The Knowledge Machine, written in a winningly accessible style that belies the import of its revisionist and groundbreaking concepts, radically reframes much of what we thought we knew about the origins of the modern world. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Science, Pseudo-Science and Society Marsha Hanen, Margaret Osler, Robert Weyant, 2006-01-01 This volume collects the papers presented at a conference on “Science, Pseudo–science and Society,” sponsored by the Calgary Institute for the Humanities and held at the University of Calgary, May 10–12, 1979. More than many such collections, this one preserves some trace of the intellectual excitement which surrounded this gathering of scholars. A primary inspiration for the symposium on “Science, Pseudoscience, and Society” was a growing awareness of the crucial role the study of pseudo–science plays in the areas of contemporary scholarship which are concerned with the nature of science and its relationship to broader social issues. This volume is organized around three major questions concerning the relationships among science, pseudo–science, and society. The papers in the first section address the question of whether it is possible to draw a sharp demarcation between science and pseudo–science and what the criteria of that demarcation might be. The papers in the second section, recognizing the historical importance of various of the pseudo–sciences, consider their impact—positive or negative—on the development of the sciences themselves. The papers in the third section deal with the question of the relationship between the sciences and pseudo–sciences, on the one hand, and social factors on the other. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: But is it Science? Robert T. Pennock, Michael Ruse, 2009 The emotionally charged debate pitting creationism against evolution has been swirling since the publication of Charles Darwin's Origins of Species in 1859. The primary locus of controversy in the United States has been the courts, which have stepped in repeatedly to rule on the constitutionality of laws and policies regarding how each may be taught in the public schools. This fully updated anthology will inform readers about the history of the debate and bring philosophical clarity to the complex arguments on both sides.--BOOK JACKET. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Scientific Thinking in Speech and Language Therapy Carmel Lum, 2005-04-11 Speech and language pathologists, like all professionals who claim to be scientific in their practice, make a public commitment to operate on the basis of knowledge derived in accordance with sound scientific standards. Yet students in communication disorders are given relatively little grounding in the fundamentals of science; indeed, they often receive implicit encouragement to rely on clinical wisdom. This pathbreaking text introduces the principles of critical scientific thinking as they relate to assessing communication problems, deciding about alternative approaches to intervention, and evaluating outcomes. The author provides many illustrative examples to help readers contextualize the ideas. Her clear presentation will help not only undergraduate and graduate students but also established professionals reason more effectively about what they are doing and why. Though the examples come from speech and language pathology, this illuminating and readable book constitutes a valuable resource for all clinical practitioners. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Salt Fix Dr. James DiNicolantonio, 2017-06-06 What if everything you know about salt is wrong? A leading cardiovascular research scientist explains how this vital crystal got a negative reputation, and shows how to lower blood pressure and experience weight loss using salt. The Salt Fix is essential reading for everyone on the keto diet! We’ve all heard the recommendation: eat no more than a teaspoon of salt a day for a healthy heart. Health-conscious Americans have hewn to the conventional wisdom that your salt shaker can put you on the fast track to a heart attack, and have suffered through bland but “heart-healthy” dinners as a result. What if the low-salt dogma is wrong? Dr. James DiNicolantonio has reviewed more than five hundred publications to unravel the impact of salt on blood pressure and heart disease. He’s reached a startling conclusion: The vast majority of us don’t need to watch our salt intake. In fact, for most of us, more salt would be advantageous to our nutrition—especially for those of us on the keto diet, as keto depletes this important mineral from our bodies. The Salt Fix tells the remarkable story of how salt became unfairly demonized—a never-before-told drama of competing egos and interests—and took the fall for another white crystal: sugar. According to The Salt Fix, too little salt can: • Make you crave sugar and refined carbs • Send the body into semistarvation mode • Lead to weight gain, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and increased blood pressure and heart rate But eating the salt you desire can improve everything, from your sleep, energy, and mental focus to your fitness, fertility, and sexual performance. It can even stave off common chronic illnesses, including heart disease. The Salt Fix shows the best ways to add salt back into your diet, offering his transformative five-step program for recalibrating your salt thermostat to achieve your unique, ideal salt intake. Science has moved on from the low-salt dogma, and so should you—your life may depend on it. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: What is Scientific Knowledge? Kevin McCain, Kostas Kampourakis, 2019-06-11 What Is Scientific Knowledge? is a much-needed collection of introductory-level chapters on the epistemology of science. Renowned historians, philosophers, science educators, and cognitive scientists have authored 19 original contributions specifically for this volume. The chapters, accessible for students in both philosophy and the sciences, serve as helpful introductions to the primary debates surrounding scientific knowledge. First-year undergraduates can readily understand the variety of discussions in the volume, and yet advanced students and scholars will encounter chapters rich enough to engage their many interests. The variety and coverage in this volume make it the perfect choice for the primary text in courses on scientific knowledge. It can also be used as a supplemental book in classes in epistemology, philosophy of science, and other related areas. Key features: * an accessible and comprehensive introduction to the epistemology of science for a wide variety of students (both undergraduate- and graduate-level) and researchers * written by an international team of senior researchers and the most promising junior scholars * addresses several questions that students and lay people interested in science may already have, including questions about how scientific knowledge is gained, its nature, and the challenges it faces. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: The Undergrowth of Science: Delusion, Self-Deception, and Human Frailty Walter Gratzer, 2001-09-13 Walter Gratzer's themes in the stories he relates in this book are collective delusion and human folly. Science is generally seen as a process bound by rigorous rules, which its practitioners must not transgress. Deliberate fraud occasionally intrudes, but it is soon detected, the perpetrators cast out and the course of discovery barely disturbed. Far more interesting are the outbreaks of self-delusion that from time to time afflict upright and competent researchers, and then spread like an epidemic or mass-hysteria through a sober and respectable scientific community. When this happens the rules by which scientists normally govern their working lives are suddenly suspended. Sometimes these episodes are provoked by personal vanity, an unwillingness to acknowledge error or even contemplate the possibility that a hard-won success is a will o' the wisp; at other times they stem from loyalty to a respected and trusted guru, or even from patriotic pride; and, worst of all, they may be a consequence of a political ideology which imposes its own interpretation on scientists' observations of the natural world. Unreason and credulity supervene, illusory phenomena are described and measured, and theories are developed to explain them - until suddenly, often for no single reason, the bubble bursts, leaving behind it a residue of acrimony, recrimination, embarrassment, and ruined reputations. Here, then, are radiations, measured with high precision yet existing only in the minds of those who observed them; the Russian water, which some thought might congeal the oceans; phantom diseases that called for heroic surgery; monkey testis implants that restored the sexual powers of ageing roues and of tired sheep; truths about genetics and about the nature of matter, perceptible only to Aryan scientists in the Third Reich or Marxist ideologues in the Soviet Union; and much more. The Undergrowth of Science explores, in terms accessible to the lay reader, the history of such episodes, up to our own time, in all their absurdity, tragedy, and pathos. |
| explain the difference between science and pseudoscience: Why Evolution Works (and Creationism Fails) Matt Young, Paul Strode, 2009-05-15 Why Evolution Works (and Creationism Fails) is an impassioned argument in favor of science—primarily the theory of evolution—and against creationism. Why impassioned? Should not scientists be dispassionate in their work? “Perhaps,” write the authors, “but it is impossible to remain neutral when our most successful scientific theories are under attack, for religious and other reasons, by laypeople and even some scientists who willfully distort scientific findings and use them for their own purposes.” Focusing on what other books omit, how science works and how pseudoscience works, Matt Young and Paul K. Strode demonstrate the futility of “scientific” creationism. They debunk the notion of intelligent design and other arguments that show evolution could not have produced life in its present form. Concluding with a frank discussion of science and religion, Why Evolution Works (and Creationism Fails) argues that science by no means excludes religion, though it ought tocast doubt on certain religious claims that are contrary to known scientific fact. |
EXPLAIN Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
The meaning of EXPLAIN is to make known. How to use explain in a sentence. Synonym Discussion of Explain.
EXPLAIN | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary
EXPLAIN definition: 1. to make something clear or easy to understand by describing or giving information about it: 2…. Learn more.
EXPLAIN Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
Explain definition: to make plain or clear; render understandable or intelligible.. See examples of EXPLAIN used in a sentence.
Explain - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms - Vocabulary.com
To explain something is to define it, show how it works, or just tell what it is. Explaining helps people understand.
EXPLAIN definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary
To explain is to make plain, clear, or intelligible something that is not known or understood: to explain a theory or a problem. To elucidate is to throw light on what before was dark and …
explain verb - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes ...
Definition of explain verb in Oxford Advanced American Dictionary. Meaning, pronunciation, picture, example sentences, grammar, usage notes, synonyms and more.
What does Explain mean? - Definitions.net
To explain means to make something clear, understandable, or comprehensible by providing information, details, or reasoning. It involves breaking down a concept, idea, process, or …
Explain Definition & Meaning | Britannica Dictionary
EXPLAIN meaning: 1 : to make (something) clear or easy to understand; 2 : to tell, show, or be the reason for or cause of something
Explain - definition of explain by The Free Dictionary
To make plain or comprehensible. 2. To define; expound: We explained our plan to the committee. 3. a. To offer reasons for or a cause of; justify: explain an error. b. To offer reasons …
EXPLAIN Synonyms: 50 Similar and Opposite Words - Merriam-Webster
Some common synonyms of explain are elucidate, explicate, expound, and interpret. While all these words mean "to make something clear or understandable," explain implies a making …
EXPLAIN Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
The meaning of EXPLAIN is to make known. How to use explain in a sentence. Synonym Discussion of Explain.
EXPLAIN | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary
EXPLAIN definition: 1. to make something clear or easy to understand by describing or giving information about it: 2…. Learn more.
EXPLAIN Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
Explain definition: to make plain or clear; render understandable or intelligible.. See examples of EXPLAIN used in a sentence.
Explain - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms - Vocabulary.com
To explain something is to define it, show how it works, or just tell what it is. Explaining helps people understand.
EXPLAIN definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary
To explain is to make plain, clear, or intelligible something that is not known or understood: to explain a theory or a problem. To elucidate is to throw light on what before was dark and …
explain verb - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes ...
Definition of explain verb in Oxford Advanced American Dictionary. Meaning, pronunciation, picture, example sentences, grammar, usage notes, synonyms and more.
What does Explain mean? - Definitions.net
To explain means to make something clear, understandable, or comprehensible by providing information, details, or reasoning. It involves breaking down a concept, idea, process, or …
Explain Definition & Meaning | Britannica Dictionary
EXPLAIN meaning: 1 : to make (something) clear or easy to understand; 2 : to tell, show, or be the reason for or cause of something
Explain - definition of explain by The Free Dictionary
To make plain or comprehensible. 2. To define; expound: We explained our plan to the committee. 3. a. To offer reasons for or a cause of; justify: explain an error. b. To offer reasons …
EXPLAIN Synonyms: 50 Similar and Opposite Words - Merriam-Webster
Some common synonyms of explain are elucidate, explicate, expound, and interpret. While all these words mean "to make something clear or understandable," explain implies a making …
