David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (3):237-243 (2009)
A definition of pseudoscience is proposed, according to which a statement is pseudoscientific if and only if it (1) pertains to an issue within the domains of science, (2) is not epistemically warranted, and (3) is part of a doctrine whose major proponents try to create the impression that it is epistemically warranted. This approach has the advantage of separating the definition of pseudoscience from the justification of the claim that science represents the most epistemically warranted statements. The definition is used to explain why proponents of widely divergent criteria for the demarcation between science and pseudoscience tend to be in almost complete agreement on the particular demarcations that should presumably be based on these general criteria
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Brian S. Baigrie (1988). Siegel on the Rationality of Science. Philosophy of Science 55 (3):435-441.
Frank Cioffi (1985). Psychoanalysis, Pseudo-Science and Testability. In. In Gregory Currie & Alan Musgrave (eds.), Popper and the Human Sciences. Distributors for the United States and Canada, Kluwer Academic Publishers. 13--44.
A. A. Derksen (1993). The Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 24 (1):17 - 42.
Athony A. Derksen (2001). The Seven Strategies of the Sophisticated Pseudo-Scientist: A Look Into Freud's Rhetorical Tool Box. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 32 (2):329-350.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
R. Paul Thompson (1980). Is Sociobiology a Pseudoscience? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:363 - 370.
Jane Maienschein (1994). Cutting Edges Cut Both Ways. Biology and Philosophy 9 (1):1-24.
John Preston (1994). Methodology, Epistemology and Conventions: Popper's Bad Start. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:314 - 322.
Robert T. Pennock (2011). Can't Philosophers Tell the Difference Between Science and Religion? Demarcation Revisited. Synthese 178 (2):177-206.
Sahotra Sarkar (2011). The Science Question in Intelligent Design. Synthese 178 (2):291 - 305.
B. D. (2000). A Pragmatic Approach to the Demarcation Problem. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 31 (2):249-267.
Robert L. Morris (1987). Parapsychology and the Demarcation Problem. Inquiry 30 (3):241 – 251.
Massimo Pigliucci (2010). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk. University of Chicago Press.
Paul Teller (2002). The Rotating Disk Argument and Humean Supervenience: Cutting the Gordian Knot. Analysis 62 (3):205–210.
Corliss G. Swain (1988). Cutting a Gordian Knot the Solution to Newcomb's Problem. Philosophical Studies 53 (3):391 - 409.
Added to index2010-07-27
Total downloads23 ( #76,425 of 1,102,862 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #84,702 of 1,102,862 )
How can I increase my downloads?