Custom The Differences between Pseudoscience and “Good” Science essay paper sample
Buy custom The Differences between Pseudoscience and “Good” Science essay paper cheap
Pseudoscience is an error in the scientific thinking since it includes the use of fallacious scientific methods of today’s science. In 1843, François Magendie called phrenology the pseudoscience that we refer today. The introduction of phrenology was for understanding the notions of the mental functions that have come from the brain. According to Hines (1988), pseudoscience it neither basis its arguments on other subjects to prove its theory, nor does it rely on the use risky anticipations. Pseudoscience is mask of science. It hardly basis its arguments on the real scientific arguments therefore it is a mare scrutiny. This is from the fact that, it does not use the weighing evidence used to define scientific arguments. Such supporting evidence includes the weighing options, hypothetical analysis of the obtained data, and the resultant theories and tools that science use to prove and make conclusions.
It is clear that pseudoscience borrows most of its ideas from the good science but it rarely uses them to meet the scientific requirements. Pseudoscience does not have scientific reference that it an base its investigations therefore it only displays facts which are indifferent, which brings about suspicions from many materials that deal with science. Because pseudoscience deals with mythological aspects, it is clear that they never concern themselves with the source of the material.
Most of the claims about the use of pseudoscience are true, since pseudoscience has its arguments based on the hypothetical nature of arguments, which are appealing to emotional beliefs. This is true since pseudoscience deals with congenial conclusions and ideologies that have not had any scientific prove.
There are problems involved with the use of pseudoscience in the real scientific analysis and conclusion making. This therefore makes the use of pseudoscience unethical in the scientific analysis and conclusions. Pseudoscience contradicts itself more often therefore ignored by most the scientists and researchers. It is also unethical to use elementary fallacies in science and this can result into scientific accidents that need to reduce accidents at all cost by the scientists and researchers. The only alternattive given for the use of pseudoscience is that, since it is based arguments it is therefore necessary to use these arguments and prove them scientifically to acquire the required results.
By use of scientific tests, it is clear that the use of science needs some indicators that are important in creating scientific scrutiny. Despite the fact that, the pseudoscience use very little or no evidence on their claims about the theories developed, it will try to interpret what science has given and later on base its arguments based on this. Most of the times the pseudo-scientists use arguments that are opposing the scientific facts. In the real sense, it is clear that the pseudoscience and science are two opposing forces, which need to clarity between the fighting forces. A good example, is the where the pseudoscience folks try to explain the classical theory of ether; this is due to the reason that they believe that they cannot conceive space as a free and empty zone. Another example is the fact that pseudoscience folks rarely understand that field are just mathematical models and not lines in the space.