Assignment 2 - Demarcation of Science and Pseudo-science

Aftab Baig Iftikhar Ahmad

Msc Software Engineering Msc Software Engineering

Q1: Please give a short summary of all three articles [1-3] taken together as a discussion of the difference between science and pseudo-science in general, and particularly astrology as example pseudo-science.

The demarcation between science and pseudoscience is part of the larger task to determine which beliefs are epistemic ally warranted. Demarcation issue is an illuminating perspective that contributes to the philosophy of science in the same way that the study of fallacies contributes to the study of informal logic and rational argumentation. Healthcare providers, insurers, government authorities and – most importantly – patients need guidance on how to distinguish between medical science and medical pseudoscience. Decision-makers in environmental policy must be able to distinguish between scientific and pseudoscientific claims. When an activity is recognized as science this usually involves an acknowledgement that it has a positive role in our strivings for knowledge. On the other hand the concept of science has been formed through a historical process It involves, of necessity, some degree of idealization in relation to common usage of the term “science”. The English word “science” is primarily used about the natural sciences and other fields of research that are considered to be similar to them. Since the second half of the 20th century, integrative disciplines such as astrophysics, evolutionary biology, biochemistry, ecology, quantum chemistry, the neurosciences, and game theory have developed at dramatic speed and contributed to tying together previously unconnected disciplines. These increased interconnections have also linked the sciences and the humanities closer to each other.

1: A biochemist performs an experiment that she interprets as showing that a particular protein has an essential role in muscle contraction. There is a consensus among her colleagues that the result is a mere artifact, due to experimental error.

2: A biochemist goes on performing one sloppy experiment after the other. She consistently interprets them as showing that a particular protein has a role in muscle contraction not accepted by other scientists.

3: A biochemist performs various sloppy experiments in different areas. One is the experiment referred to in case 1. Much of her work is of the same quality. She does not propagate any particular unorthodox theory.

According to common usage, 1 and 3 are regarded as cases of bad science and only 2 as a case of pseudoscience.

Pseudoscience is a methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific, or that is made to appear to be scientific, but which does not adhere to an appropriate scientific methodology lacks supporting evidence or plausibility or otherwise lacks scientific status. "being able to distinguish science from pseudo-science such as astrology, quackery, the occult, and superstition”. He gave astrology and psychoanalysis as examples of pseudoscience, and Einstein's theory of relativity as an example of science. Science is also distinguishable from revelation, theology, or spirituality in that it offers insight into the physical world obtained by empirical research. The concept of pseudoscience rests on an understanding that scientific methodology has been misrepresented or misapplied with respect to a given theory, but many philosophers of science maintain that different kinds of methods are held as appropriate across different fields and different eras of human history. "For the most part, repudiated its pseudoscientific beginnings and joined the world of rational healthcare." "If we would stand up and be counted on the side of reason, we ought to drop terms like 'pseudo-science' and 'unscientific' from our vocabulary; they are just hollow phrases which do only emotive work for us"

Astrologers strongly object to these kinds of tests. They emphasize that one should always look at the whole chart. Scientists and astrologers are in conflict over whether astrology works because they tend to look at different things: scientists are concerned with accuracy whereas astrologers look for client satisfaction.

Q2: Why is it important to distinguish science from non-science? Describe the problem of demarcation and its significance for science according to Sven Ove Hansson’s article [1]

All non-science is not pseudoscience and science has non –trivial borders. Religion, metaphysics are all types of non-scientific systematized knowledge. Science has internal demarcation problem to distinguish between good and bad science.

Science can contribute to clarify the conceptual distinctions. The state or fact of knowing; knowledge or cognizance of something specified or implied; also, with wider reference, knowledge (more or less extensive) as a personal attribute.

Non-scieeince may be defined as an area of knowledge which does not meet the criteria of science (CONPTT). Non-science topic areas may be very logical and based on good reasoning, but simply do not fall within the realm of science. They would include any belief system, e.g., religious beliefs, philosophy, personal opinions or attitudes, a sense of esthetics, or ethics.

Q3: What are the characteristics of pseudoscience according to [2]

The standards for determining whether a body of knowledge, methodology, or practice is scientific can vary from field to field. There are, however, a number of basic principles that are widely agreed upon by scientists, such as reproducibility and verifiability. which allows further investigation to determine whether a hypothesis or theory related to given phenomena is both valid and reliable for use by others, including other scientists and researchers. Pseudoscience often presents data that seems to support its claims while suppressing or refusing to consider data that conflict with its claims. Proponents of pseudoscientific claims, especially in organic medicine, alternative medicine, naturopathy and mental health, often resort to the "mantra of holism" to explain negative findings. reversed burden of proof. In science, the burden of proof rests on those making a claim, not on the critic. "Pseudoscientific" arguments may neglect this principle and demand that skeptics demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that a claim is false. Appeals to holism as opposed to reductionism: Proponents of pseudoscientific claims, especially in organic medicine, alternative medicine, naturopathy and mental health, often resort to the "mantra of holism" to explain negative findings.

Q4: Give a short account of astrotest [3] and its results.

Astrologers strongly object to these kinds of tests. They emphasize that one should always look at the whole chart. The Sun sign is only one factor that is influenced by numerous other astrological factors. The system as a whole does not equal the sum of its parts, because these parts are often in conflict with one another. The influence of the Sun-sign can easily be cancelled out by the position of the Moon or anything else. We don't have to argue about this issue because there are tests in which astrologers can use the whole chart. I am referring to the so-called matching test. My proposal was as follows: All participants will receive the birth data (date, time and place) of seven anonymous test subjects. The response was beyond expectation. More than 70 people showed willingness to participate. It was not easy to find suitable test subjects. Initially, I collected people who had all been born in 1948.

Results

Eventually, 44 astrologers completed the test. Many of them had much experience. Half of the participants had read at least fifty books on astrology. Three quarters had taken a course in astrology and one quarter was training others. At least half of the participants had analyzed over a hundred astrological charts and one-third was frequently paid for its services. In fact, the most successful astrologer achieved only three correct matches, whereas half of the participants (22) did not score a single hit. The average number of hits was 0.75. This is 0.25 below the mean change expectation (MCE), a deviation that is not significant.

Q5: What are your conclusions on science contra pseudo-science discussion?

The conclusion on science pseudo-science discussion is given below,

“Pseudoscience is a methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific, or that is made to appear to be scientific, but which does not adhere to an appropriate scientific methodology lacks supporting evidence or plausibility or otherwise lacks scientific status. "being able to distinguish science from pseudo-science such as astrology, quackery, the occult, and superstition”. The concept of pseudoscience rests on an understanding that scientific methodology has been misrepresented or misapplied with respect to a given theory, but many philosophers of science maintain that different kinds of methods are held as appropriate across different fields and different eras of human history.”