E-LOGOS 2020, 27(2):4-17 | DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.474

Science, Pseudoscience and Parascience

Filip Tvrdý
Katedra filozofie, Filozofická fakulta, Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, Křížkovského 12, 779 00 Olomouc, ČR.

Nalezení demarkačního kritéria pro identifikaci vědeckého poznání je vůbec nejdůležitějším úkolem normativní epistemologie. Pseudověda není neškodnou volnočasovou aktivitou, může představovat nebezpečí pro chod liberálně demokratických společností a blaho jejich občanů. Nejprve je nastíněna možnost, jak instrumentálně definovat vědu, aniž bychom sklouzli k neblahému dědictví pojmového esencialismu. Druhá část je věnována Popperovu falzifikačnímu kritériu a námitkám jeho kritiků, které nakonec vedly k opuštění „naivního“ falzifikacionismu. Poté představuji dvě slibná řešení problému, a to ostenzivní definici pseudovědy a kognitivní výzkum pseudovědeckého myšlení. V závěru navrhuji rozšíření typologie alternativ vůči vědě o paravědu.

Keywords: epistemologie, filozofie vědy, pseudověda, kognitivní psychologie, argumentace, epistemické neřesti

Finding the demarcation criterion for the identification of scientific knowledge is the most important task of normative epistemology. Pseudoscience is not a harmless leisure activity, it can pose a danger to the functioning of liberal democratic societies and the well-being of their citizens. First, there is an outline of how to define science instrumentally without slipping into the detrimental heritage of conceptual essentialism. The second part is dedicated to Popper’s falsification criterion and the objections of its opponents, which eventually led to the abandonment of “naïve” falsificationism. Then I present two promising solutions to the problem, namely the ostensive definition of pseudoscience and the cognitive research of pseudoscientific thinking. In conclusion, I suggest to further extend the typology of alternatives to science to include parascience.

Keywords: epistemology, philosophy of science, pseudoscience, cognitive psychology, argumentation, epistemic vices

Received: July 7, 2020; Revised: December 7, 2020; Accepted: December 16, 2020; Prepublished online: December 30, 2020; Published: December 31, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Tvrdý, F. (2020). Science, Pseudoscience and Parascience. E-LOGOS, 27(2), 4-17. doi: 10.18267/j.e-logos.474
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Ayer, A. J. 1946. Language, Truth, and Logic. 2. vyd. New York: Dover Publications.
    2. Baudrillard, Jean. 1994. "On Nihilism". In Simulacra and Simulation, přeložil Sheila Faria Glaser, 159-64. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Go to original source...
    3. Bielik, Lukáš. 2012. "Možnosti a limity demarkácie vedy". Filozofia 67 (7): 530-44.
    4. Blancke, Stefaan, Maarten Boudry a Johan Braeckman. 2018. "Whence Pseudoscience? An Epidemiological Approach". Mètode, č. 8: 133-39. https://doi.org/10.7203/metode.8.10007. Go to original source...
    5. Blancke, Stefaan, Maarten Boudry a Massimo Pigliucci. 2017. "Why Do Irrational Beliefs Mimic Science? The Cultural Evolution of Pseudoscience". Theoria 83 (1): 78-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12109. Go to original source...
    6. Bok, Bart J., Lawrence E. Jerome a Paul Kurtz. 1975. "Objections to Astrology: A Statement by 186 Leading Scientists". The Humanist 35 (5): 4-6.
    7. Boudry, Maarten. 2013. "Loki's Wager and Laudan's Error". In Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem, editovali Massimo Pigliucci a Maarten Boudry, 79-98. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226051826.003.0006. Go to original source...
    8. Boudry, Maarten, Stefaan Blancke a Massimo Pigliucci. 2015. "What Makes Weird Beliefs Thrive? The Epidemiology of Pseudoscience". Philosophical Psychology 28 (8): 1177-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2014.971946. Go to original source...
    9. Boudry, Maarten a Johan Braeckman. 2011. "Immunizing Strategies and Epistemic Defense Mechanisms". Philosophia 39 (1): 145-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-010-9254-9. Go to original source...
    10. Boudry, Maarten a Johan Braeckman. 2012. "How Convenient! The Epistemic Rationale of Self-Validating Belief Systems". Philosophical Psychology 25 (3): 341-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2011.579420. Go to original source...
    11. Bunge, Mario. 1983. Treatise on Basic Philosophy, Vol. 6: Epistemology & Methodology II - Understanding the World. Dordrecht: Springer. Go to original source...
    12. Bunge, Mario. 1984. "What Is Pseudoscience? " Skeptical Inquirer 9 (1): 36-46.
    13. Carlson, Shawn. 1985. "A Double-Blind Test of Astrology". Nature 318 (6045): 419-25. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1038/318419a0. Go to original source...
    14. Carnap, Rudolf. 1991. "Překonání metafyziky logickou analýzou jazyka". Přeložil Karel Berka. Filosofický časopis 39 (4): 623-43.
    15. Cromer, Alan. 1993. Uncommon Sense: The Heretical Nature of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    16. Derksen, A. A. 1993. "The Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science". Journal for General Philosophy of Science 24 (1): 17-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00769513. Go to original source...
    17. Derksen, A. A. 2001. "The Seven Strategies of the Sophisticated Pseudo-Scientist: A Look into Freud's Rhetorical Tool Box". Journal for General Philosophy of Science 32 (2): 329-50. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013100717113. Go to original source...
    18. Dupré, John. 1993. The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    19. Festinger, Leon. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston: Row, Peterson and Company. Go to original source...
    20. Feyerabend, Paul K. 1978. "The Strange Case of Astrology". In Science in a Free Society, 91-96. London: New Left Books.
    21. Feyerabend, Paul K. 2001. Rozprava proti metodě. Přeložil Jiří Fiala. Praha: Aurora.
    22. Feynman, Richard P. 1985. "Cargo Cult Science". In "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!": Adventures of a Curious Character, editovali Ralph Leighton a Edward Hutchings, 308-17. New York: W. W. Norton.
    23. Forer, Bertram R. 1949. "The Fallacy of Personal Validation: A Classroom Demonstration of Gullibility". The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 44 (1): 118-23. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0059240. Go to original source...
    24. Frazer, James George. 1994. Zlatá ratolest. Přeložili Erich Herold a Věra Heroldová-Šťovíčková. Praha: Mladá fronta.
    25. Gopnik, Alison. 1996. "The Scientist as Child". Philosophy of Science 63 (4): 485-514. https://doi.org/10.1086/289970. Go to original source...
    26. Gopnik, Alison. 2012. "Scientific Thinking in Young Children: Theoretical Advances, Empirical Research, and Policy Implications". Science 337 (6102): 1623-27. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1223416. Go to original source...
    27. Gordin, Michael D. 2012. The Pseudoscience Wars: Immanuel Velikovsky and the Birth of the Modern Fringe. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Go to original source...
    28. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1997. "Nonoverlapping Magisteria". Natural History 106 (2): 16-22.
    29. Grove, J. W. 1985. "Rationality at Risk: Science against Pseudoscience". Minerva 23 (2): 216-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01099943. Go to original source...
    30. Gruenberger, Fred J. 1964. "A Measure for Crackpots". Science 145 (3639): 1413-15. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.145.3639.1413. Go to original source...
    31. Hanegraaff, Wouter J. 1996. "New Age Science". In New Age Religion and Western Culture: Esotericism in the Mirror of Secular Thought, 62-76. Leiden: Brill. Go to original source...
    32. Hansson, Sven Ove. 1996. "Defining Pseudo-Science". Philosophia naturalis 33: 169-76.
    33. Hansson, Sven Ove. 2013. "Defining Pseudoscience and Science". In Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem, editovali Massimo Pigliucci a Maarten Boudry, 61-77. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226051826.003.0005. Go to original source...
    34. Hansson, Sven Ove. 2017. "Science and Pseudo-Science". In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, editoval Edward N. Zalta, Summer 2017. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/pseudo-science.
    35. Hippel, William von a Robert Trivers. 2011. "The Evolution and Psychology of Self-Deception". Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (1): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10001354. Go to original source...
    36. Hume, David. 1996. Zkoumání o lidském rozumu. Přeložil Josef Moural. Praha: Svoboda.
    37. Huxley, Thomas Henry. 1870. "Criticisms on The Origin of Species". In Lay Sermons, Addresses, and Reviews, 328-50. London: Macmillan. Go to original source...
    38. Jedlička, Petr. 2016. "Kritika některých aspektů díla K. R. Poppera ve vztahu k demarkačnímu problému". E-LOGOS 23 (1): 25-45. http://doi.org/10.18267/j.e-logos.429. Go to original source...
    39. Johnson, W. E. 1921. Logic: Part I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    40. Kanitscheider, Bernulf. 1991. "A Philosopher Looks at Astrology". Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 16 (3): 258-66. https://doi.org/10.1179/isr.1991.16.3.258. Go to original source...
    41. Kitcher, Philip. 1990. "The Division of Cognitive Labor". The Journal of Philosophy 87 (1): 5-22. https://doi.org/10.2307/2026796. Go to original source...
    42. Kitcher, Philip. 1993. The Advancement of Science: Science Without Legend, Objectivity Without Illusions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    43. Kovářová, Vendula. 2016. "W. W. Bartley: přehodnocení problému demarkace mezi vědou a metafyzikou". E-LOGOS 23 (2): 10-26. http://doi.org/10.18267/j.e-logos.433. Go to original source...
    44. Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970. "Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?" In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, editovali Imre Lakatos a Alan Musgrave, 1-23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171434.003. Go to original source...
    45. Lakatos, Imre. 1968. "Criticism and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes". Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 69: 149-86. https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/69.1.149. Go to original source...
    46. Lakatos, Imre. 1970. "Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes". In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, editovali Imre Lakatos a Alan Musgrave, 91-195. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171434.009. Go to original source...
    47. Lakatos, Imre. 1978. "Introduction: Science and Pseudoscience". In The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, editovali John Worrall a Gregory Currie, 1-7. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621123.002. Go to original source...
    48. Laudan, Larry. 1983. "The Demise of the Demarcation Problem". In Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, editovali Robert S. Cohen a Larry Laudan, 111-27. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7055-7_6. Go to original source...
    49. Lilienfeld, Scott O. 2010. "Can Psychology Become a Science?" Personality and Individual Differences 49 (4): 281-88. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.024. Go to original source...
    50. Lilienfeld, Scott O., Steven Jay Lynn a Rachel J. Ammirati. 2015. "Science Versus Pseudoscience". In The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology, editovali Robin L. Cautin a Scott O. Lilienfeld, 1-7. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118625392.wbecp572. Go to original source...
    51. Lugg, Andrew. 1987. "Bunkum, Flim-Flam and Quackery: Pseudoscience as a Philosophical Problem". Dialectica 41 (3): 221-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-8361.1987.tb00889.x. Go to original source...
    52. Mahner, Martin. 2007. "Demarcating Science from Non-Science". In General Philosophy of Science, editoval Theo A. F. Kuipers, 515-75. Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. Amsterdam: North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044451548-3/50011-2. Go to original source...
    53. McCauley, Robert N. 2011. Why Religion Is Natural and Science Is Not. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    54. Merton, Robert K. 1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Editoval Norman W. Storer. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
    55. Monton, Bradley. 2014. "Pseudoscience". In The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science, editovali Martin Curd a Stathis Psillos, 2. vyd., 469-78. New York: Routledge.
    56. Neubauer, Zdeněk. 1995. "Kosmologický rámec astrologie". Kritický sborník 15 (3): 42-48.
    57. Nickerson, Raymond S. 1998. "Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises". Review of General Psychology 2 (2): 175-220. https://doi.org/10.1037%2F1089-2680.2.2.175. Go to original source...
    58. Pennock, Robert T. 1996. "Naturalism, Evidence and Creationism: The Case of Phillip Johnson". Biology and Philosophy 11 (4): 543-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138334. Go to original source...
    59. Polya, George. 1954. Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, Vol. 1: Induction and Analogy in Mathematics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Go to original source...
    60. Popper, Karl R. 1963. "Science: Conjectures and Refutations". In Conjectures and Refutations, 33-39. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
    61. Popper, Karl R. 1994a. Otevřená společnost a její nepřátelé I: Uhranutí Platónem. Přeložil Miloš Calda. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    62. Popper, Karl R. 1994b. Otevřená společnost a její nepřátelé II: Vlna proroctví. Přeložila Jana Odehnalová. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    63. Popper, Karl R. 1995. Věčné hledání: intelektuální autobiografie. Přeložila Jana Odehnalová. Praha: Prostor.
    64. Popper, Karl R. 1997. Logika vědeckého bádání. Přeložil Jiří Fiala. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    65. Quine, W. V. O. 1957. "The Scope and Language of Science". The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 8 (29): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/VIII.29.1. Go to original source...
    66. Quine, W. V. O. 1990. "The Phoneme's Long Shadow". In Emics and Etics: The Insider/Outsider Debate, editovali Thomas N. Headland, Kenneth L. Pike a Marvin Harris, 164-67. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
    67. Quine, W. V. O. 1995. "Naturalism; Or, Living Within One's Means". Dialectica 49 (2-4): 251-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-8361.1995.tb00164.x. Go to original source...
    68. Quine, W. V. O. 2006a. "Dvě dogmata empirismu". In Vybrané články k ontologii a epistemologii, editovali Tomáš Marvan a Ludmila Dostálová, přeložil Prokop Sousedík, 82-106. Plzeň: Západočeská univerzita.
    69. Quine, W. V. O. 2006b. "O tom, co je". In Vybrané články k ontologii a epistemologii, editovali Tomáš Marvan a Ludmila Dostálová, přeložila Ludmila Dostálová, 32-54. Plzeň: Západočeská univerzita.
    70. Regal, Brian. 2009. Pseudoscience: A Critical Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: Greenwood Press.
    71. Resnik, David B. 2000. "A Pragmatic Approach to the Demarcation Problem". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 31 (2): 249-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-3681(00)00004-2. Go to original source...
    72. Ridley, Mark. 2004. Evolution. 3. vyd. Malden: Blackwell.
    73. Rosenberg, Alex. 2011. The Atheist's Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life without Illusions. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
    74. Shermer, Michael, ed. 2002. The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.
    75. Shtulman, Andrew a Kate McCallum. 2014. "Cognitive Reflection Predicts Science Understanding". Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 36: 2937-42.
    76. Sloman, Steven A. a Philip Fernbach. 2017. The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone. New York: Riverhead Books.
    77. Taliga, Miloš. 2016. "Je Popperova falzifikovateľnosť kritériom demarkácie?" Filozofia 71 (8): 644-55.
    78. Thagard, Paul R. 1978. "Why Astrology Is a Pseudoscience". Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978 (1): 223-34. https://doi.org/10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1978.1.192639. Go to original source...
    79. Thagard, Paul R. 1980. "Resemblance, Correlation and Pseudoscience". In Science, Pseudo-Science and Society, editovali Marsha P. Hanen, Margaret J. Osier a Robert G. Weyant, 17-27. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
    80. Thagard, Paul R. 1988. Computational Philosophy of Science. Cambridge: MIT Press. Go to original source...
    81. Tvrdý, Filip. 2018. "Antiscientismus, konceptuální analýza, naturalismus". Pro-Fil 19 (1): 49-61. https://doi.org/10.5817/pf18-1-1764. Go to original source...
    82. Wason, Peter C. 1960. "On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task". Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 12 (3): 129-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470216008416717. Go to original source...
    83. Whitehead, Alfred North. 1929. "The Organisation of Thought". In The Aims of Education and Other Essays, 106-23. New York: Macmillan.
    84. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1993. Filosofická zkoumání. Přeložil Jiří Pechar. Praha: Filosofia.
    85. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 2007. Tractatus logico-philosophicus. Přeložil Petr Glombíček. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    86. Wolpert, Lewis. 1992. The Unnatural Nature of Science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    87. Zygmunt, Joseph F. 1970. "Prophetic Failure and Chiliastic Identity: The Case of Jehovah's Witnesses". American Journal of Sociology 75 (6): 926-48. https://doi.org/10.1086/224846. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content