How Can We Distinguish Between Science and Pseudo-Science?
- Submitted by: Cryse
- Views: 896
- Category: Other
- Date Submitted: 09/03/2010 11:44 PM
- Pages: 3
- Report this Essay
Pseudo-sciences, in discerning from proper sciences, are beliefs that appear and are claimed to be ‘scientific’, but they do not adhere to be ad rem to real scientific methodologies and therefore are not accredited with this status, whereas real sciences are that they can be scientifically testable. Fields that are classified as real sciences include biology, physics, and chemistry, while pseudo-sciences often encompass New Age practices, such as extra-sensory perceptions (ESP), astrology, channeling with ghosts and spirits, palmistry, tarot card reading, and crystal healing.
In the modern era that we live in today, the instillation of scientific-thinking among people has led us to not recognize pseudo-sciences as real sciences because their hypothesises are commonly thought to be vague in credibility. Consider the difference between astronomy and astrology. Scientists can expound the processes on how stars are formed by the fusion of hydrogen and helium to create a sphere of plasma, and how these stars can shine together to form patterns that we see in the night sky as constellations. However, it seems scientifically implausible on the other hand in explaining how constellations can give people certain characteristics when they are born under a certain star sign. Astrology as a pseudo-science, compared to astronomy, which is a real science, is indeterminate since scientists have no means to verify or falsify on how it is possible that the movements and positions of celestial bodies are able to influence an individual’s personality and fate.
The reason why most of these practices aren’t attested as genuine sciences because they aren’t proven to be scientific by inductivism. One component of this is observation. The advancement of technology has allowed scientists to proclaim new scientific discoveries, like discovering microbes by using a microscope or faraway exoplanets by using a radar telescope. We learn best through perception, and it is often by through...
In the modern era that we live in today, the instillation of scientific-thinking among people has led us to not recognize pseudo-sciences as real sciences because their hypothesises are commonly thought to be vague in credibility. Consider the difference between astronomy and astrology. Scientists can expound the processes on how stars are formed by the fusion of hydrogen and helium to create a sphere of plasma, and how these stars can shine together to form patterns that we see in the night sky as constellations. However, it seems scientifically implausible on the other hand in explaining how constellations can give people certain characteristics when they are born under a certain star sign. Astrology as a pseudo-science, compared to astronomy, which is a real science, is indeterminate since scientists have no means to verify or falsify on how it is possible that the movements and positions of celestial bodies are able to influence an individual’s personality and fate.
The reason why most of these practices aren’t attested as genuine sciences because they aren’t proven to be scientific by inductivism. One component of this is observation. The advancement of technology has allowed scientists to proclaim new scientific discoveries, like discovering microbes by using a microscope or faraway exoplanets by using a radar telescope. We learn best through perception, and it is often by through...