Assignment 2 - Demarcation of Science and Pseudo-science
VINAY HIREMATH
Masters in Software Engineering
vhh09001@student.mdh.se
ASHWINI MAYAKAR
Masters in Software Engineering
amr09002@student.mdh.se
1.
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.
Ans: Article 1:
The first article talks about the purpose of demarcation .The article uses
four different practical applications namely Healthcare, Expert Testimony,
Environmental Policies, and Science Education. These applications strongly support
science.
The pseudoscience has been defined as follows,” pseudoscience is an
activity or a teaching which has to satisfy the following two criteria
1) Its not scientific and
2) Its major proponents try to create the impression that it is scientific.
Further on the basis of 3 case studies, fraud science and pseudo science are
explained clearly. Hansson modifies the 2nd criteria as , “it is part of a non-scientific
doctrine whose major proponents try to create the impression that it is scientific”
There is problem of demarcation which dates back to Aristotle’s analytics. There
were positivists who developed verification approaches to science. This was not
historically correct as they attempted to demarcate between science and meta
physics. Popper came up with falsification concept as the key to the demarcation
problem. Thomas Kuhn criticised the Popper’s falsification concept,came up with a
demarcation idea based on puzzle solving. Hence there were many demarcation
concepts and the list of seven criteria relates to all the criteria made by several
writers.
The conclusion would be that science is a systematic study that always gives
an open opportunity to test and find results.
Astrology is claimed to be pseudo science as it fails to yield back accurate result. As
per the article, the astrotest conducted failed to give result as per the
Article 2:
In this article they have explained about pseudoscience as a methodology or
belief that is claimed to be scientific but it can not give any acknowledgement on its
results. Here Karl Popper considered astrology to be pseudoscientific activity,
because astrologers keep very vague claims and never be refuted.
National Science Foundation (NSF) reported that there is a lack of knowledge
of pseudoscientific issues in society and pseudoscientific practices are commonly
followed. In clinical psychology, pseudoscientific therapies such as neuro-linguistic
programming, rebirthing are being adopted by government and by public, but they
also states that scientifically unsupported therapies used by popular psychology
might harm vulnerable members of public.
At last they explained the boundaries between science & pseudoscience.
There are well-known accepted scientific theories that were originally considered
pseudoscientific, For example: Continental drift, Cosmology & Radiation hormesis.
Further they commented that there are some traditional or ancient practices such as
“Accupuncture “and “Traditional Chinese Medicine” which are not pseudoscience
because their proponents do not claim the practices to be scientific according to
today’s standard of scientific method.
Article 3:
Astrology is a best example for pseudoscience. Here the author Rob
Nanninga has clearly explained about astrology and astrotest. The astrologers
believe that Sun sign is the only one factor that is influenced by numerous other
astrological factors. They came to know that all people with the same sun sign do not
have more common characters.
Here author arranged one astrotest by inviting all astrologers. All participants
received birth data( date, month, year) of 7 anonymous test subjects. They also
received seven questionnaires filled out by these subjects. The questions were
devised by the participants. They have to match each birth chart with the
corresponding questionnaire. To encourage participation author offered 5000
guilders (2500 $) to those who were able to match all seven charts. Response was
unexpected more than 70 people participated in it.
Finally in the result, the most successful astrologer achieved only three
correct matches, whereas half of the participants 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. Moreover, there was no evidence that the
most experienced astrologers did any better than beginners.
2.
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]
Ans: Science is a culture of doubts and has particular methods, which also give s
acknowledgement on results, where as non-science is not related with science, for
eg: Playing golf, swimming etc. Pseudoscience has no proofs, and does not
guarantee on accurate results. Its very important to distinguish science from nonscience because science has proofs and exact results but non-science does not
have any proofs.
The demarcation problem has been started since from a very long time, the
logical positivists suggested a basic idea for a scientific statement could be
distinguished from a metaphysical statement in a principle possible to verify.
The problem of Demarcation has a history and has been traced back to
Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics. The criteria of demarcation was done based on many
grounds namely logical positivists verification, falsificationism, puzzle solving. The
positivists came up with a verification concept for the demarcation. This was not
historically correct as it tried to demarcate science with pseudoscience. Popper
described a new concept called falsification. Popper gave scientific status to few
pseudoscientific statements. Hence his claim was criticized.Thomas Kuhn made his
criteria of puzzle solving.The puzzle solving requires the current theory to be
accepted and puzzle to be defined.Astrology is not a science as it does not involves
puzzles. Popper disagreed with this statement. According to Popper, astrologers
indulge in puzzle-solving and hence astrology should be considered as
Science.Lakatos came up with a criteria based on scientific progress. His claim was,
“the demarcation criterion should not be applied to an isolated hypothesis or theory
but rather to a whole research program that is characterized by a series of theories
successively replacing each other”. Science would be progressive if it has more
positive results on research field. George proposed that demarcation could be based
on the requirement that a scientific discipline be integrated into other sciences.
Demarcation criteria was made on epistemic norms where science was characterized
as ethos that can be summarized as four sets of institutional imperatives namely
universalism, communism, disinterestedness, organized sceptisim. His criteria have
often been dismissed by sociologists as oversimplified, and they have only had
limited influence in philosophical discussions on the demarcation issue. Most authors
who have proposed the criterion for demarcation have put forward a list of criteria.
The list has seven areas on which demarcation can be made.
.
3.
What are the characteristics of pseudoscience according to [2]
Ans: The characteristics of pseudoscience are :
Practitioners follow a theory but they usually fail to critically evaluate the theory (as in
Astrology). Pseudoscience lacks specific measurements and failed to seek an
explanation that requires assumptions and operational definitions are not used.
Psuedoscience makes use of a language which reveals only a part of fact and is
vaguely characterized.
Pseudoscience elements argue that skeptics demonstrate beyond a reasonable level
and claim the theory to be false.
Criteria for deciding pseudoscience:

Belief in authority

Non–repeatable experiments

Handpicked examples ( Benchmarks)

Unwillingness to test

Disregard of reputing information
Proponents of pseudoscientific claims have been found to yield negative results in
the field of organic medicine, alternative medicine, naturopathy and mental health.
4.
Give a short account of astrotest [3] and its results.
Ans: The author,Rob Nanninga decided to offer an Astrotest. He decided the amount
2500$ would be given as price. He wanted to find a solution to the difference of
opinions on the issue, “Astrologer can really predict”. The astrotest included the
astrologers as participants. The participants will receive the birth data (date, month,
year, time) of 7 unknown people referred as test subjects. A set of questions was
prepared to be answered by the test subjects. The astrologers will have to match the
birth chart with the questionnaire related to the test subjects.
The author selected the 7 unknown test subjects initially born in the year 1948. He
was informed by president of NGPA that the registered birth times were often
rounded off. Hence with this analysis the author selected another set of test
subjects. He then used a computer program and calculated the birth charts.
The astrologers on an average sent 10 questionnaires to be answered by the test
subjects. A set of 25 questions were finalized by the author. The test subjects had to
answer 25 questions on several subjects like education, vocation, hobbies etc.
Among all questionnaire 24 multiple choice questionnaires were selected by the
author taken from the Berkeley personality profile, with the opinion of 8 experienced
astrologers. The astrologers were given a span of 10 weeks to accomplish the tasks.
Results were not as expected by the author. About 44 experienced astrologers
completed the test. The most successful astrologer achieved 3 correct matches,
where as 50% did not have single hit. The author explains the possibilities of showing
the selected combinations with help of a chart. According to the charts there were 49
possible combinations none was selected more that 12 times. There were only 2
astrologers with same entries. Many failed to explain why their prediction went wrong
.Many of them said that the information was not sufficient to make the predictions.
5.
What are your conclusions on science contra pseudo-science discussion?
Ans: The discussion was interesting as it was interactive. The most interesting part of
the discussion was Astrology. Astrology is considered to be pseudoscience as it fails
to produce any accurate details. It cannot give results as per the scientific
requirements. Astrology is a nice way of counseling and astrologers also insist on the
personal satisfaction of their customers. This eventually becomes a good reason for
them to escape from the questions of science. There is no single procedure for all
astrologers in common to follow. Science has always a systematic way towards
knowledge and is open for any person to test and fine results. Solving every day’s
problem is Science. Hence as we study more on science, the more we experiment
and try to find results. There are many other fields that are considered to be
pseudoscience like homeopathy, creationism.
Science gives proofs and acknowledges the results where as pseudoscience
does not give any proofs and acknowledges. Pseudoscience is not a science; tries to
pretend it is scientific. Eg: Astrology. We also discussed about religion and science.
Science is a culture of doubts where as Religion is culture of trusts. We can not test
in religion we can only trust, where as we can both trust and test in Science.