Pseudosciences are practices that masquerade themselves as science but have little or no scientific rigor or cohesion to them. They claim to be factual and scientific, yet do not adhere to scientific methodology and principles (Braithwaite 2006). In simple and lucid terms, pseudoscience is non-scientific and fails to adhere to the basic scientific principles, most importantly and notably the scientific principle of falsability. Pseudoscience lacks empirical and practical evidences and proofs for most of its claims and practices and hence discarded as misleading and false by leading scientists and scientific organizations. But the proponents of different pseudosciences claim them to be accepted authority and hence often term them to be based on proven facts. There are two lobbies, which are often on the loggerheads when it comes to acceptance of pseudosciences or their advantages and disadvantages. There are several reasons behind both opinions on pseudosciences and the paper aims to explore them well.
The side, which favors pseudoscience and vies for its validity often, comes up with number of reasons and ideas to put across their points. First and Foremost, they claim pseudoscience to be based on creativity and imagination, a pre-requisite for any science. They often contend that the famous world-renowned scientists across the world have believed and accepted over the years that creativity is much more significant than basic intelligence and that creativity is often the central idea or the mother of any science. Since as per their views all pseudosciences are inspired by creativity they are as much valid, if not more, as other sciences or scientific beliefs around. There are numerous pseudosciences like Astrology, psychics, voodoo etc., which have been available for thousands of years now and have been accepted by different generations and people over centuries. The proponents and followers of pseudosciences assert that had pseudosciences been unscientific and illogical, they would have been obsolete by now. Since many popular beliefs and claims have been discarded over the years, same fate would have been awarded to pseudosciences had they been totally unscientific as often claimed by the detractors of pseudosciences. Moreover, the popularity and acceptability of pseudosciences like Astrology is also often believed to be the indication and evidence behind the validity of such pseudosciences. The followers often claim, “How could so many people be misled if Astrology or other so called ‘pseudosciences’ are so wrong and false?”
The opposite lobby also quotes plethora of reasons for their skepticism related to pseudosciences. They often allege pseudosciences to be suffering of number of fallacies, errors and anomalies. They characteristically blame pseudosciences to be suffering from invariable exegesis, indifference towards the famous and scientifically accepted criteria of valid evidence and ignorance. According to the scientific class Pseudoscience persuades using misinformation, appeals to widespread belief, rhetoric, propaganda, and misinterpretation, rather than presenting valid evidences (which presumably do not even exist) (Coker 2012). They believe that pseudoscience displays excessive indifference to facts based n science and that it specifically begins with a hypothesis. They adjudge the popularity of pseudosciences to the arbitrary conventions of human nature that pseudoscience finds its roots in. Moreover, each and every pseudoscience is designed in a way to appeal emotionally and hence victimizes common and illiterate people more often. Pseudoscience if often believed to be a strong promoter of superstitions and misled beliefs too. The biggest disadvantage of pseudoscience according to those who are opposed to it lies in testing. They claim that in most circumstances, either the particular subject can’t be tested, hasn’t been tested or has failed all professional and scientific tests (Johnson, n.d). Pseudoscience if often termed as ‘Conceptual Hijacking’, which is believed to be supported by verbose language, analogy based thinking and confirmation bias. Moreover the dogmatic approach and attitude of the followers of pseudoscience is often not taken to nicely by the opposers of pseudoscience. They claim the arrogance of pseudoscientists or their believers and the unacceptability of putting pseudoscience to scientific tests as being the biggest sign of inherent and intrinsic flaws related to pseudoscience.
Pseudoscience is clearly a controversial and highly debatable topic in itself. Both the sides have their beliefs and claims about the validity and non-validity of pseudoscience respectively. The controversial nature of pseudoscience has fuelled many altercations and debates over the years and continues to be so. There is no final or accepted decision about the nature of pseudoscience and it continues to amaze both its followers and detractors equally.
Works Cited
Braithwaite, Jason. ”What is Pseudoscience?”
Rational Inquiry. 13 April 2013. Web. 2006
< http://www.rationalinquiry.org.uk/what-is-pseudoscience.php>
Coker, Rory. ”Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience”
< https://webspace.utexas.edu/cokerwr/www/index.html/distinguish.htm>
Johnson, Steve. ”Advantages and Disadvantages of Pseudoscience”
eHow. 13 April 2013. Web. n.d
< http://www.ehow.com/info_8410093_advantages-disadvantages-pseudoscience.html>
