lecture 1: science and pseudoscience n 1. science n 2. protoscience n 3. pseudoscience n 4....

Lecture 1:Lecture 1:Science and PseudoscienceScience and Pseudoscience

1. Science1. Science 2. Protoscience2. Protoscience 3. Pseudoscience3. Pseudoscience 4. Pathological Science4. Pathological Science 5. Fraud in Science5. Fraud in Science 6. Conclusions6. Conclusions

ScienceScience

No clear set of defining No clear set of defining characteristics to differentiate characteristics to differentiate science from non-science.science from non-science.

Karl Popper's notion of falsifiability Karl Popper's notion of falsifiability is important ...is important ...

Marxism - non-falsifiable?Marxism - non-falsifiable?

Psychoanalysis - Psychoanalysis - non-falsifiable?non-falsifiable?

Benchmarks of ScienceBenchmarks of Science

““Good science” can be thought of as Good science” can be thought of as meeting a number of benchmarks.meeting a number of benchmarks.

Not all sciences, particularly social Not all sciences, particularly social sciences, meet all of the benchmarks sciences, meet all of the benchmarks fully (Edge et al, 1986).fully (Edge et al, 1986).

Parapsychology will be considered Parapsychology will be considered against some of these benchmarks in against some of these benchmarks in a subsequent lecture.a subsequent lecture.

ProtoscienceProtoscience

Stent (1972) defines prematurity in Stent (1972) defines prematurity in science as follows: “A discovery is science as follows: “A discovery is premature if its implications premature if its implications cannot be connected by a series of cannot be connected by a series of simple logical steps to canonical, simple logical steps to canonical, or generally accepted, knowledge”or generally accepted, knowledge”

Alfred Wegener:Alfred Wegener:Continental Drift (1912)Continental Drift (1912)

Thomas Kuhn’sThomas Kuhn’sScientific RevolutionsScientific Revolutions

Importance of paradigms (or the Importance of paradigms (or the disciplinary matrix)disciplinary matrix)

Normal vs. revolutionary scienceNormal vs. revolutionary science Will parapsychology force a Will parapsychology force a

paradigm shift?paradigm shift?

The roots of chemistryThe roots of chemistry

The roots of physicsThe roots of physics

The roots of astronomy?The roots of astronomy?

Radner & Radner’s (1982) Radner & Radner’s (1982) “Marks of Pseudoscience”“Marks of Pseudoscience”

(1) Non-falsifiability - e.g., aspects (1) Non-falsifiability - e.g., aspects of Creationism . . .of Creationism . . .

Geological and Fossil Geological and Fossil Evidence?Evidence?

Light from distant stars?Light from distant stars?

Tree rings in the Garden of Tree rings in the Garden of Eden?Eden?

Work of God … or Satan?Work of God … or Satan?

Conspiracy TheoriesConspiracy Theories

Government and military cover-Government and military cover-ups of UFOsups of UFOs

Ritualised Satanic child abuse ...Ritualised Satanic child abuse ...


(2) The “grab-bag” approach to (2) The “grab-bag” approach to evidence:evidence:

“ “Pseudoscientists have the attitude Pseudoscientists have the attitude that sheer quantity of evidence makes that sheer quantity of evidence makes up for any deficiency in the quality of up for any deficiency in the quality of individual pieces of evidence. They pile individual pieces of evidence. They pile up prodigious amounts of questionable up prodigious amounts of questionable data in support of their pet theories.”data in support of their pet theories.”

““Books on UFOs report Books on UFOs report sighting after sighting of sighting after sighting of

mysterious objects.”mysterious objects.”

““Charles Berlitz and his Charles Berlitz and his Bermuda triangle followers Bermuda triangle followers

give case after case of give case after case of ships and planes ships and planes

disappearing without a disappearing without a trace.”trace.”

““Von Daniken trots out Von Daniken trots out artifact after artifact in artifact after artifact in

support of his hypothesis support of his hypothesis about extraterrestrial about extraterrestrial visitation in ancient visitation in ancient

times.”times.”


(3) “Looking for mysteries”: The (3) “Looking for mysteries”: The assumption that if conventional assumption that if conventional theorists cannot supply completely theorists cannot supply completely watertight explanations for every watertight explanations for every single case that is put before single case that is put before them, then they should admit that them, then they should admit that the pseudoscientific claim is valid.the pseudoscientific claim is valid.

Is this reasonable?Is this reasonable?

Reluctance to allow critical Reluctance to allow critical investigation ...investigation ...


(4) Excessive reliance upon (4) Excessive reliance upon ancient myths and legends as ancient myths and legends as being literally true ...being literally true ...

Von Daniken and Elijah ...Von Daniken and Elijah ...


(5) Argument from the basis of (5) Argument from the basis of “spurious similarity” ...“spurious similarity” ...


(6) Refusal to revise ideas in the (6) Refusal to revise ideas in the light of criticism ...light of criticism ...

Mario Bunge’s (1980) Mario Bunge’s (1980) criteria for a criteria for a

PseudosciencePseudoscience its theory of knowledge is its theory of knowledge is

subjectivistic, containing aspects subjectivistic, containing aspects accessible only to the initiatedaccessible only to the initiated

its formal background is modest, its formal background is modest, with only rare involvement of with only rare involvement of mathematics or logicmathematics or logic

its fund of knowledge contains its fund of knowledge contains untestable or even false untestable or even false hypotheses which are in conflict hypotheses which are in conflict with a larger body of knowledgewith a larger body of knowledge


Pseudoscience (cont.)Pseudoscience (cont.)

its methods are neither checkable its methods are neither checkable by alternative methods nor by alternative methods nor justifiable in terms of well-justifiable in terms of well-confirmed theoriesconfirmed theories

it borrows nothing from it borrows nothing from neighbouring fields, there is no neighbouring fields, there is no overlap with another field of overlap with another field of researchresearch


Pseudoscience (cont.)Pseudoscience (cont.)

it has no specific background of it has no specific background of relatively confirmed theoriesrelatively confirmed theories

it has an unchanging body of belief, it has an unchanging body of belief, whereas scientific enquiry teems with whereas scientific enquiry teems with noveltynovelty

it has a world-view admitting immaterial it has a world-view admitting immaterial entities, such as disembodied minds, entities, such as disembodied minds, whereas science countenances only whereas science countenances only changing concrete thingschanging concrete things

Pathological SciencePathological Science

Wolpert (1992) summarizes Langmuir's Wolpert (1992) summarizes Langmuir's criteria for pathological science as criteria for pathological science as follows:follows:

the maximum effect observed is very the maximum effect observed is very small, near the limit of detectabilitysmall, near the limit of detectability

the magnitude of the effect seems the magnitude of the effect seems independent of the causeindependent of the cause

claims of great accuracyclaims of great accuracy usually a fantastic theoryusually a fantastic theory criticisms are met by ad hoc excuses.criticisms are met by ad hoc excuses.

Examples ofExamples ofPathological SciencePathological Science

The “canals” of Mars - Schiaparelli, The “canals” of Mars - Schiaparelli, 1877; then Flammarion and Lowell1877; then Flammarion and Lowell

Blondlot’s N-raysBlondlot’s N-rays

Discovered in 1903Discovered in 1903– increased the brightness of electrical increased the brightness of electrical

sparkspark– emitted by Sun, flames and incandescent emitted by Sun, flames and incandescent

objects, as well as the nervous systemobjects, as well as the nervous system– ““secondary sources” of N-rays, such as secondary sources” of N-rays, such as

the fluid in the eye, would absorb N-rays the fluid in the eye, would absorb N-rays and re-emit themand re-emit them

Dozens of replications, but ...Dozens of replications, but ...

N-rays don’t exist!N-rays don’t exist!

As shown by Robert Wood, As shown by Robert Wood, American physicist.American physicist.

PolywaterPolywater

Discovered by Russian scientists in Discovered by Russian scientists in 1960s1960s

Hundreds of papers publishedHundreds of papers published Unusual properties probably Unusual properties probably

caused by impurities in ordinary caused by impurities in ordinary water!water!

HomeopathyHomeopathy

Based upon two principles:Based upon two principles:– Like cures likeLike cures like– Dilution INCREASES potencyDilution INCREASES potency

Martin Gardner (1991)Martin Gardner (1991)

A moderate homeopathic dose, called A moderate homeopathic dose, called "30 "30 cc," is arrived at by first diluting ," is arrived at by first diluting the drug to a hundredth part and the drug to a hundredth part and then repeating the process 30 times. then repeating the process 30 times. As someone pointed out, it is like As someone pointed out, it is like taking a grain of a substance and taking a grain of a substance and dissolving it in billions of spheres of dissolving it in billions of spheres of water, each with the diameter of the water, each with the diameter of the solar system.solar system.

Benveniste et al. (1988)Benveniste et al. (1988)

Reported effects of an antiserum Reported effects of an antiserum when diluted to one part in 10when diluted to one part in 10120120

Cf. 10Cf. 102020 stars in the universe! stars in the universe! Replication attempt under the Replication attempt under the

scrutiny of a team from scrutiny of a team from Nature:Nature:– John Maddox (editor)John Maddox (editor)– Walter Stewart (chemist, expert in fraud)Walter Stewart (chemist, expert in fraud)– James Randi (conjuror and sceptic)James Randi (conjuror and sceptic)

Critical ReportCritical Report

The series of experiments were:The series of experiments were:– statistically ill-controlledstatistically ill-controlled– subject to systematic error including subject to systematic error including

observer biasobserver bias– data which did not fit the hypothesis had data which did not fit the hypothesis had

been simply excludedbeen simply excluded BBC’s BBC’s Horizon Horizon reported a update on this reported a update on this

case, including another failed attempt case, including another failed attempt at replicationat replication

Cold Fusion (1989)Cold Fusion (1989)

““Cold fusion” refers to the release of Cold fusion” refers to the release of energy from the fusion of deuterium energy from the fusion of deuterium nuclei within a palladium electrode at nuclei within a palladium electrode at room temperature.room temperature.

Reported by B. Stanley Pons and Reported by B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, chemists at the Martin Fleischmann, chemists at the University of Utah, on 23 March 1989University of Utah, on 23 March 1989

Replication attempts failedReplication attempts failed

Common ThemesCommon Themes 1) the adoption of various strategies to 1) the adoption of various strategies to

render the original claims non-falsifiable;render the original claims non-falsifiable;

2) the influence of human bias, allowing 2) the influence of human bias, allowing investigators to fool themselves (and investigators to fool themselves (and others) into seeing what they want to see;others) into seeing what they want to see;

3) a tendency to bypass the usual 3) a tendency to bypass the usual channels of dissemination for scientific channels of dissemination for scientific results with prior release directly to the results with prior release directly to the world's media.world's media.

Fraud in ScienceFraud in Science

A problem in all areas of science A problem in all areas of science (Broad & Wade, 1982)(Broad & Wade, 1982)

Not all cases are clear-cutNot all cases are clear-cut

Conclusion 1Conclusion 1

Universally acceptable criteria to Universally acceptable criteria to distinguish science from non-distinguish science from non-science do not exist. It may be more science do not exist. It may be more useful to think in terms of a number useful to think in terms of a number of benchmarks of “good science” vs of benchmarks of “good science” vs “bad science” and to recognise that “bad science” and to recognise that fields of intellectual activity will vary fields of intellectual activity will vary with respect to the degree to which with respect to the degree to which they meet these criteria.they meet these criteria.


Similarly, it has not proved possible to Similarly, it has not proved possible to produce sets of non-problematic produce sets of non-problematic criteria to clearly and unambiguously criteria to clearly and unambiguously characterise fields as characterise fields as “pseudosciences”. Although certain “pseudosciences”. Although certain common themes run through most common themes run through most such attempts, it is notable that such attempts, it is notable that different commentators often produce different commentators often produce radically different sets of allegedly radically different sets of allegedly defining features.defining features.


Consideration of these issues is Consideration of these issues is useful, however, in that it casts useful, however, in that it casts light upon the human face of light upon the human face of science and may serve to alert us science and may serve to alert us to the ever-present dangers of our to the ever-present dangers of our own biases.own biases.

AcknowledgementAcknowledgement

With thanks to Hilary Evans, With thanks to Hilary Evans, proprietor of the Mary Evans proprietor of the Mary Evans Picture Library, for permission to Picture Library, for permission to use illustrations featured in this use illustrations featured in this presentation. These illustrations presentation. These illustrations must not be reproduced in any must not be reproduced in any form without permission from the form without permission from the Mary Evans Picture Library.Mary Evans Picture Library.

lecture 1: science and pseudoscience n 1. science n 2. protoscience n 3. pseudoscience n 4....

Documents

blondlots nrays n

n parapsychology

logic n

initiated n

novelty n

polywater n

marks of pseudoscience

revolutionary science