Advertisement
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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) |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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-- |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: Science and Unreason Daisie Radner, Michael Radner, 1982 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: Evidence and Evolution Elliott Sober, 2008-03-27 How should the concept of evidence be understood? And how does the concept of evidence apply to the controversy about creationism as well as to work in evolutionary biology about natural selection and common ancestry? In this rich and wide-ranging book, Elliott Sober investigates general questions about probability and evidence and shows how the answers he develops to those questions apply to the specifics of evolutionary biology. Drawing on a set of fascinating examples, he analyzes whether claims about intelligent design are untestable; whether they are discredited by the fact that many adaptations are imperfect; how evidence bears on whether present species trace back to common ancestors; how hypotheses about natural selection can be tested, and many other issues. His book will interest all readers who want to understand philosophical questions about evidence and evolution, as they arise both in Darwin's work and in contemporary biological research. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: The Dancing Wu Li Masters Gary Zukav, 2012-12-31 This is an account of the essential aspects of the new physics for those with little or no knowledge of mathematics or science. It describes current theories of quantum mechanics, Einstein's special and general theories of relativity and other speculations, alluding throughout to parallels with modern psychology and metaphorical abstractions to Buddhism and Taoism. The author has also written The Seat of the Soul. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: Sexing the Brain Lesley Rogers, 2001 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.. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: The New Atlantis , 2008 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: The Electric Universe Wallace Thornhill, David Talbott, 2007 |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: The Wim Hof Method Wim Hof, 2020-09-24 STAR OF BBC ONE'S FREEZE THE FEAR 'I've never felt so alive' JOE WICKS 'A fascinating look at Wim's incredible life and method' FEARNE COTTON My hope is to inspire you to retake control of your body and life by unleashing the immense power of the mind. 'The Iceman' Wim Hof shares his remarkable life story and powerful method for supercharging your health and happiness. Refined over forty years and championed by scientists across the globe, you'll learn how to harness three key elements of Cold, Breathing and Mindset to take ownership over your own mind and wellbeing. 'The book will change your life' BEN FOGLE 'Wim is a legend of the power ice has to heal and empower' BEAR GRYLLS |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: Feng Shui: Teaching About Science and Pseudoscience Michael R. Matthews, 2019-07-18 This book provides a richly documented account of the historical, cultural, philosophical and practical dimensions of feng shui. It argues that where feng shui is entrenched educational systems have a responsibility to examine its claims, and that this examination provides opportunities for students to better learn about the key features of the nature of science, the demarcation of science and non-science, the characteristics of pseudoscience, and the engagement of science with culture and worldviews. The arguments presented for feng shui being a pseudoscience can be marshalled when considering a whole range of comparable beliefs and the educational benefit of their appraisal. Feng shui is a deeply-entrenched, three-millennia-old system of Asian beliefs and practices about nature, architecture, health, and divination that has garnered a growing presence outside of Asia. It is part of a comprehensive and ancient worldview built around belief in chi (qi) the putative universal energy or life-force that animates all existence, the cosmos, the solar system, the earth, and human bodies. Harmonious living requires building in accord with local chi streams; good health requires replenishment and manipulation of internal chi flow; and a beneficent afterlife is enhanced when buried in conformity with chi directions. Traditional Chinese Medicine is based on the proper manipulation of internal chi by acupuncture, tai-chi and qigong exercise, and herbal dietary supplements. Matthews has produced another tour de force that will repay close study by students, scientists, and all those concerned to understand science, culture, and the science/culture nexus. Harvey Siegel, Philosophy, University of Miami, USA With great erudition and even greater fluidity of style, Matthews introduces us to this now-world-wide belief system. Michael Ruse, Philosophy, Florida State University, USA The book is one of the best research works published on Feng Shui. Wang Youjun, Philosophy, Shanghai Normal University, China The history is fascinating. The analysis makes an important contribution to science literature. James Alcock, Psychology, York University, Canada This book provides an in-depth study of Feng Shui in different periods, considering its philosophical, historical and educational dimensions; especially from a perspective of the ‘demarcation problem’ between science and pseudoscience. Yao Dazhi, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis Robert S. Cohen, R. Laudan, 2012-12-06 To celebrate Adolf Griinbaum's sixtieth birthday by offering him this bouquet of essays written for this purpose was the happy task of an autonomous Editorial Committee: Wesley C. Salmon, Nicholas Rescher, Larry Laudan, Carl G. Hempel, and Robert S. Cohen. To present the book within the Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science was altogether fitting and natural, for Griinbaum has' been friend and supporter of philosophy of science at Boston University for twenty-five years, and unofficial godfather to the Boston Colloquium. To regret that we could not include contributions from all his well-wishers, critical admirers and admiring critics, is only to regret that we did not have an encyclopedic space at the committee's disposal. But we, and all involved in this book, speak for all the others in the philo sophical, scientific, and personal worlds of Adolf Griinbaum in greeting him on May 15, 1983, with our wishes for his health, his scholarship, his happiness. Our gratitude is due to Carolyn Fawcett for her care and accuracy in editing this book, and for the preparation of the Index; and to Elizabeth McMunn for her help again and again, especially in preparation of the Bibliography of the Published Writings of Adolf Griinbaum; and to Thelma Griinbaum for encouraging, planning, and cheering. Boston University R.S.C. Center for the Philosophy and History of Science M.W.W. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: 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. |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: Worlds in Collision , With this book Immanuel Velikovsky first presented the revolutionary results of his 10-year-long interdisciplinary research to the public, founded modern catastrophism - based on eyewitness reports by our ancestors - shook the doctrine of uniformity of geology as well as Darwin's theory of evolution, put our view of the history of our solar system, of the Earth and of humanity on a completely new basis - and caused an uproar that is still going on today. Worlds in Collision - written in a brilliant, easily understandable and entertaining style and full to the brim with precise information - can be considered one of the most important and most challenging books in the history of science. Not without reason was this book found open on Einstein's desk after his death. For all those who have ever wondered about the evolution of the earth, the history of mankind, traditions, religions, mythology or just the world as it is today, Worlds in Collision is an absolute MUST-READ! |
| difference between pseudoscience and science: Research Methodology in Marketing Martin Eisend, Alfred Kuss, 2019-03-01 This textbook describes and explains the fundamentals of applying empirical methods for theory building and theory testing in marketing research. The authors explain the foundations in philosophy of science and the various methodological approaches to readers who are working empirically with the purpose of developing and testing theories in marketing. The primary target group of the book are graduate students and PhD students who are preparing their empirical research projects, e.g. for a master thesis or a dissertation. |
Percentage Difference Calculator
Aug 17, 2023 · Percentage Difference Formula: Percentage difference equals the absolute value of the change in value, divided by the average of the 2 numbers, all multiplied by 100. We then …
DIFFERENCE Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
The meaning of DIFFERENCE is the quality or state of being dissimilar or different. How to use difference in a sentence.
DIFFERENCE | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary
DIFFERENCE definition: 1. the way in which two or more things which you are comparing are not the same: 2. a…. Learn more.
Difference or Diference – Which is Correct? - Two Minute English
May 21, 2025 · The correct spelling is difference. The word ‘diference’ with a single ‘f’ is a common misspelling and should be avoided. ‘Difference’ refers to the quality or condition of …
difference - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Apr 23, 2025 · difference (countable and uncountable, plural differences) (uncountable) The quality of being different. You need to learn to be more tolerant of difference. (countable) A …
Difference - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms - Vocabulary.com
In math, a difference is the remainder left after subtracting one number from another. Chimps and gorillas are both apes, but there are a lot of differences between them. If something doesn't …
difference noun - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage …
Definition of difference noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. [countable, uncountable] the way in which two people or things are not like each other; the way in which …
DIFFERENCE definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary
The difference between two things is the way in which they are unlike each other.
Difference - definition of difference by The Free Dictionary
Difference is the most general: differences in color and size; a difference of degree but not of kind. Dissimilarity and unlikeness often suggest a wide or fundamental difference: the dissimilarity …
DIFFERENCE Definition & Meaning - Dictionary.com
Difference, discrepancy, disparity, dissimilarity imply perceivable unlikeness, variation, or diversity. Difference refers to a lack of identity or a degree of unlikeness: a difference of …
Percentage Difference Calculator
Aug 17, 2023 · Percentage Difference Formula: Percentage difference equals the absolute value of the change in value, divided by the average of the 2 numbers, all multiplied by 100. We then …
DIFFERENCE Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
The meaning of DIFFERENCE is the quality or state of being dissimilar or different. How to use difference in a sentence.
DIFFERENCE | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary
DIFFERENCE definition: 1. the way in which two or more things which you are comparing are not the same: 2. a…. Learn more.
Difference or Diference – Which is Correct? - Two Minute English
May 21, 2025 · The correct spelling is difference. The word ‘diference’ with a single ‘f’ is a common misspelling and should be avoided. ‘Difference’ refers to the quality or condition of being unlike …
difference - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Apr 23, 2025 · difference (countable and uncountable, plural differences) (uncountable) The quality of being different. You need to learn to be more tolerant of difference. (countable) A …
Difference - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms - Vocabulary.com
In math, a difference is the remainder left after subtracting one number from another. Chimps and gorillas are both apes, but there are a lot of differences between them. If something doesn't …
difference noun - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage …
Definition of difference noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. [countable, uncountable] the way in which two people or things are not like each other; the way in which …
DIFFERENCE definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary
The difference between two things is the way in which they are unlike each other.
Difference - definition of difference by The Free Dictionary
Difference is the most general: differences in color and size; a difference of degree but not of kind. Dissimilarity and unlikeness often suggest a wide or fundamental difference: the dissimilarity …
DIFFERENCE Definition & Meaning - Dictionary.com
Difference, discrepancy, disparity, dissimilarity imply perceivable unlikeness, variation, or diversity. Difference refers to a lack of identity or a degree of unlikeness: a difference of …
