What is a Demarcation Method?
Philosophers for over a century have debated on the particular justifications a science and pseudoscience should be scrutinized upon. There has not been a clear distinction between pseudoscience and science that all philosophers recognize because of differing ideas. Even though there is disagreement on the criterion of defining a pseudoscience, the different demarcations usually come to the same general conclusion as to what a pseudoscience is. It is the method of how the pseudoscience should be evaluated in determining it is a pseudoscience.
Here is a link to an article can explain further how to differentiate whether a field is scientific or pseudoscientific.
Philosophers for over a century have debated on the particular justifications a science and pseudoscience should be scrutinized upon. There has not been a clear distinction between pseudoscience and science that all philosophers recognize because of differing ideas. Even though there is disagreement on the criterion of defining a pseudoscience, the different demarcations usually come to the same general conclusion as to what a pseudoscience is. It is the method of how the pseudoscience should be evaluated in determining it is a pseudoscience.
Here is a link to an article can explain further how to differentiate whether a field is scientific or pseudoscientific.
paul R. thagardIn Thagard’s method, a theory is pseudoscientific if it satisfies his two conditions:
(1) The theory has made little progress in comparison to alternative theories and that the theory still faces many unsolved problems. (2) The followers or practitioners of that theory make little attempt or effort to solve the problems of the theory, do not show concern in attempting to evaluate the theory to alternatives, and are selective in considering confirmations and disconfirmations. If a theory satisfies both of these conditions, then the theory is pseudoscientific. In his demarcation, Thagard’s criterion provides a way of defining a pseudoscience as fields of study that are stagnant and have little activity when it comes to scientific investigations. |
Thagard’s method of demarcation offers a clear way of defining a pseudoscience based on scientific progression and how it stands against investigations attempting to disprove it. This method draws on how the history of a theory explains its scientific progression. For example, the theory of evolution has changed and altered over the years and has justified its claims in comparison to other theories. A pseudoscience would not have this quality because of its inability to alter its theory based on new evidence and observations. Also, other demarcations may not necessarily claim a theory is pseudoscientific. For example, falsifiability, originally proposed by Karl Popper, states that a theory is scientific if it is able to conflict with possible or conceivable observations. This is a problem because some pseudosciences are able to be tested and refuted, which means that they are sciences in terms of Popper’s falsifiability. Because of this problem and other problems in proposed demarcations, I believe Thagard’s method is the best method for the demarcation of pseudosciences and my pseudoscience in particular.
Sources:
Sheremer, M. (2011, August 16). What Is Pseudoscience? Retrieved December 10, 2014, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-pseudoscience
Why Is Astrology A Pseudoscience, Paul R. Thagard, In Philosophy of Science Association 1978 Volume 1, edited by P.D. Asquith and I. Hacking (East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, 1978)
Sources:
Sheremer, M. (2011, August 16). What Is Pseudoscience? Retrieved December 10, 2014, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-pseudoscience
Why Is Astrology A Pseudoscience, Paul R. Thagard, In Philosophy of Science Association 1978 Volume 1, edited by P.D. Asquith and I. Hacking (East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, 1978)