Related categories
Siblings:History/traditions: Demarcation of Science

48 found
Order:
  1. Science and Illusions.Luigi Scorzato -
    It is mostly agreed that Popper's criterion of falsifiability fails to provide a useful demarcation between science and pseudo-science, because ad-hoc assumptions are always able to save any theory that conflicts with the empirical data, and a characterization of ad-hoc assumptions is lacking. Moreover, adding some testable predictions is not very difficult. It should be emphasized that the Duhem-Quine argument does not simply make the demarcation approximate, but it makes it totally useless. Indeed, no philosophical criterion of demarcation is presently (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. The Methods of Science: No Dogs or Philosophers Allowed.Ken Knisely, Deborah Mayo, Robert Rynasiewicz & Drew Arrowood - forthcoming - DVD.
    What is science, and what is it not? Is falsifiability the key to drawing this line? How and why does science work? Should we worry whether science is talking about a "real" world? And should we stop thinking there is a single thing we can call "the scientific method"? With Deborah Mayo, Robert Rynasiewicz, and Drew Arrowood.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Sobre el respeto a la evidencia empírica. McIntyre en La actitud científica.Mariano Sanjuan - 2021 - Daimon: Revista Internacional de Filosofía 82:189-195.
    No hace mucho tiempo, la demarcación, el cambio teórico o la racionalidad científica coloreaban la paleta de la filosofía de la ciencia. Hoy estos problemas son vistos como asuntos clásicos de la disciplina. En La actitud científica, Lee McIntyre renueva el escaparate filosófico recuperando el problema de la demarcación, defendiendo que lo distintivo de la ciencia es “que se preocupa por la evidencia y está dispuesta a modificar sus teorías en función de la evidencia”. Se presentan a continuación una síntesis (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Institutional Degeneration of Science.Jüri Eintalu - 2019 - Philosophical Drops.
    Since Popper and Lakatos, the demarcation line between science and non-science has been considered one of the fundamental issues of the philosophy of science. According to Lakatos, pseudoscience is a non-science, which appears as science, using science's public authority. Since then, mountains of texts have been published on how non-sciences, such as astrology, are not sciences. -/- But the enemy is not on the other side of the border. The enemy is in our midst. Science has been institutionalized. The best (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. The Gordian Knot of Demarcation: Tying Up Some Loose Ends.Kåre Letrud - 2019 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 32 (1):3-11.
    In this article, I seek to improve upon a definition of pseudoscience put forward by Sven Ove Hansson. I argue that not only does its use of ‘pseudoscientific statement’ as definiendum inadequately address the theoretical issue of demarcation, it also makes the definition inapt for practical demarcation. Moreover, I argue that Hanson’s definition subsumes statements and associated practices that are forms of bad science, resulting in an unfavourably wide concept. I try to save the definition from the brunt of this (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. Scientificity and The Law of Theory Demarcation.Ameer Sarwar & Patrick Fraser - 2018 - Scientonomy: Journal for the Science of Science 2:55-66.
    The demarcation between science and non-science seems to play an important role in the process of scientific change, as theories regularly transition from being considered scientific to being considered unscientific and vice versa. However, theoretical scientonomy is yet to shed light on this process. The goal of this paper is to tackle the problem of demarcation from the scientonomic perspective. Specifically, we introduce scientificity as a distinct epistemic stance that an agent can take towards a theory. We contend that changes (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7. Is African Science True Science? Reflections on the Methods of African Science.Oseni Taiwo Afisi - 2016 - Filosofia Theoretica: Journal of African Philosophy, Culture and Religions 5 (1):59-75.
    The general character of science and the methodology it employs are in specific terms referred to as observation and experimentation. These two methodologies reflect how science differs from other systematic modes of inquiries. This description characterises, strictly, ‘Western science’ and it is contrasted with the indigenous mode of enquiry that has come under the name, ‘African science’. In contemporary scholarship, ‘African science’ is being condemned to the level of the mysticoreligious or supernaturalist worldview. ‘African science’ is said to be purely (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. To Be Scientific Is To Be Interactive.Seungbae Park - 2016 - European Journal of Science and Theology 12 (1):77-86.
    Hempel, Popper, and Kuhn argue that to be scientific is to be testable, to be falsifiable, and most nearly to do normal science, respectively. I argue that to be scientific is largely to be interactive, offering some examples from science to show that the ideas from different fields of science interact with one another. The results of the interactions are that hypotheses become more plausible, new phenomena are explained and predicted, we understand phenomena from a new perspective, and our worldview (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  9. Are Different Standards Warranted to Evaluate Psi?George Williams - 2016 - Journal of Parapsychology 79 (2):186-202.
    Throughout the debate on psi, skeptics have almost universally insisted on different standards for evaluating the evidence, claiming that psi represents a radical departure from our current scientific understanding. Thus, there is considerable ambiguity about what standard of evaluation psi must meet. Little attention has been paid to the possible harm to the integrity of scientific investigation from this resulting inconsistency in testing standards. Some have proposed using a Bayesian framework as an improvement on this dilemma in order to more (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. Loki's Wager and Laudan's Error: On Genuine and Territorial Demarcation.Maarten Boudry - 2013 - In Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. pp. 79--98.
  11. Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem.Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry (eds.) - 2013 - University of Chicago Press.
    What sets the practice of rigorously tested, sound science apart from pseudoscience? In this volume, the contributors seek to answer this question, known to philosophers of science as “the demarcation problem.” This issue has a long history in philosophy, stretching as far back as the early twentieth century and the work of Karl Popper. But by the late 1980s, scholars in the field began to treat the demarcation problem as impossible to solve and futile to ponder. However, the essays that (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  12. Possibilities and Limits of Medical Science: Debates Over Double‐Blind Clinical Trials of Intercessory Prayer.Wendy Cadge - 2012 - Zygon 47 (1):43-64.
    . This article traces the intellectual history of scientific studies of intercessory prayer published in English between 1965 and the present by focusing on the conflict and discussion they prompted in the medical literature. I analyze these debates with attention to how researchers articulate the possibilities and limits medical science has for studying intercessory prayer over time. I delineate three groups of researchers and commentators: those who think intercessory prayer can and should be studied scientifically, those who are more skeptical (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  13. The Eagle and the Starlings: Galileo’s Argument for the Autonomy of Science—How Pertinent is It Today?Hugh Lacey & Pablo R. Mariconda - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (1):122-131.
  14. The Concept of Scientific Research.Lisa Bortolotti - 2011 - In Carlos Maria Romeo Casabona (ed.), Los Nuevos Horizontes de la Investigacion Genetica. Comares.
    Chapter discussing what it takes for an activity to be an instance of scientific research.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Exploring the Hinterland of Science: Massimo Pigliucci: Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2010, 332pp, $20.00 PB. [REVIEW]Maarten Boudry - 2011 - Metascience 20 (1):173-176.
    Book review of " Massimo Pigliucci: Nonsense on stilts: How to tell science from bunk. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2010".
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. Exploring the Hinterland of Science: Massimo Pigliucci: Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2010, 332pp, $20.00 PB.Maarten Boudry - 2011 - Metascience 20 (1):173-176.
  17. In Reference To Wojciech Sady’s Lecture: What Determines The Scientific Character Of Natural Studies.Paweł Jarnicki - 2011 - Studia Philosophica Wratislaviensia 6 (2):55-61.
    This paper is a polemic with Wojciech Sady’s forgoing paper. The main objection to his new approach to demarcation problem is that this approach does not accomplish the criterion formulated in it . Sady accuses medical ethics of not being scientific but forgets that he does it from the philosophical point of view. The only reasonable way to solve the demarcation problem is to define its practical aim — what do we need it for? One of such possible aims is (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. On an Allegedly Essential Feature of Criteria for the Demarcation of Science.Sebastian Lutz - 2011 - The Reasoner 5 (8):125–126.
    Laudan’s argument against the possibility of a demarcation criterion for scientific theories rests on establishing that any criterion must be a necessary and sufficient condition. But Laudan’s argument at most establishes that any criterion must provide a necessary condition and a possibly different sufficient condition. His own claims suggest that such a criterion is possible.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  19. Can’T Philosophers Tell the Difference Between Science and Religion?: Demarcation Revisited.Robert Pennock - 2011 - Synthese 178 (2):177-206.
    In the 2005 Kitzmiller v Dover Area School Board case, a federal district court ruled that Intelligent Design creationism was not science, but a disguised religious view and that teaching it in public schools is unconstitutional. But creationists contend that it is illegitimate to distinguish science and religion, citing philosophers Quinn and especially Laudan, who had criticized a similar ruling in the 1981 McLean v. Arkansas creation-science case on the grounds that no necessary and sufficient demarcation criterion was possible and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  20. Nagel on Public Education and Intelligent Design.Scott F. Aikin, Michael Harbour & Robert B. Talisse - 2010 - Journal of Philosophical Research 35:209-219.
    In a recent article, Thomas Nagel argues against the court’s decision to strike down the Dover school district’s requirement that biology teachers in Dover public schools inform their students about Intelligent Design. Nagel contends that this ruling relies on questionable demarcation between science and nonscience and consequently misapplies the Establishment Clause of the constitution. Instead, he argues in favor of making room for an open discussion of these issues rather than an outright prohibition against Intelligent Design. We contend that Nagel’s (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. How Not to Attack Intelligent Design Creationism: Philosophical Misconceptions About Methodological Naturalism. [REVIEW]Maarten Boudry, Stefaan Blancke & Johan Braeckman - 2010 - Foundations of Science 15 (3):227-244.
    In recent controversies about Intelligent Design Creationism (IDC), the principle of methodological naturalism (MN) has played an important role. In this paper, an often neglected distinction is made between two different conceptions of MN, each with its respective rationale and with a different view on the proper role of MN in science. According to one popular conception, MN is a self-imposed or intrinsic limitation of science, which means that science is simply not equipped to deal with claims of the supernatural (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  22. Understanding Scientific Study Via Process Modeling.Robert W. P. Luk - 2010 - Foundations of Science 15 (1):49-78.
    This paper argues that scientific studies distinguish themselves from other studies by a combination of their processes, their (knowledge) elements and the roles of these elements. This is supported by constructing a process model. An illustrative example based on Newtonian mechanics shows how scientific knowledge is structured according to the process model. To distinguish scientific studies from research and scientific research, two additional process models are built for such processes. We apply these process models: (1) to argue that scientific progress (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  23. Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk.Massimo Pigliucci - 2010 - University of Chicago Press.
    Introduction : science versus pseudoscience and the "demarcation problem" -- Hard science, soft science -- Almost science -- Pseudoscience -- Blame the media? -- Debates on science : the rise of think tanks and the decline of public intellectuals -- Science and politics : the case of global warming -- Science in the courtroom : the case against intelligent design -- From superstition to natural philosophy -- From natural philosophy to modern science -- The science wars I : do we (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  24. How Science Textbooks Treat Scientific Method: A Philosopher's Perspective.James Blachowicz - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (2):303--344.
    This paper examines, from the point of view of a philosopher of science, what it is that introductory science textbooks say and do not say about 'scientific method'. Seventy introductory texts in a variety of natural and social sciences provided the material for this study. The inadequacy of these textbook accounts is apparent in three general areas: (a) the simple empiricist view of science that tends to predominate; (b) the demarcation between scientific and non-scientific inquiry and (c) the avoidance of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  25. Has Laudan Killed the Demarcation Problem?Kirsten Walsh - 2009 - Dissertation, University of Melbourne
    The ‘Demarcation Problem’ is to mark the boundary between things that are scientific and things that are not. Philosophers have worked on this problem for a long time, and yet there is still no consensus solution. Should we continue to hope, or must we draw a more sceptical conclusion? In his paper, ‘The Demise of the Demarcation Problem’, Larry Laudan (1983) does the latter. In this thesis, I address the three arguments he gives for this conclusion.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. That’s Not Science! The Role of Moral Philosophy in the Science/Non-Science Divide.Bjørn Hofmann - 2007 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (3):243-256.
    The science/non-science distinction has become increasingly blurred. This paper investigates whether recent cases of fraud in science can shed light on the distinction. First, it investigates whether there is an absolute distinction between science and non-science with respect to fraud, and in particular with regards to manipulation and fabrication of data. Finding that it is very hard to make such a distinction leads to the second step: scrutinizing whether there is a normative distinction between science and non-science. This is done (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. Federalism in Science — Complementarity Vs Perspectivism: Reply to Harré.Daniel Andler - 2006 - Synthese 151 (3):519 - 522.
  28. Rouse-Ing Out the Legitimation Project: Scientific Practice and the Problem of Demarcation.Edward Slowik - 2001 - Ratio 14 (2):171–184.
    This essay critically examines Joseph Rouse's arguments against, what he dubs, the "legitimation project", which are the attempts to delimit and justify the scientific enterprise by means of global, "a priori" principles. Stipulating that a more adequate picture of science can be obtained by viewing it as a continuously transforming pattern of situated activities, Rouse believes that only by refocusing attention upon the actual practice of science can philosophers begin to detach themselves from the irresolvable epistemological problems that have remained (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. Science: Freedom and Reason, Comments on Mara Beller's 'Quantum Dialogue'. [REVIEW]Orly R. Shenker - 2000 - Iyyun 50 (1):55-62.
    Mara Beller's book Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution is a book in history and historiography, which invites a philosophical reading. The book offers a new and quite radical approach in the philosophy of science, which Beller calls dialogism, and it demonstrates the application of this approach by studying cases in the history of physics. This paper reconstructs of some of the book's theses, in a way which emphasises its philosophical insights, and goes on to shows how philosophically far (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. But Is It Science?Jerry Goodenough - 1998 - Philosophy Now 22:46-48.
  31. The Place of Metaphysics in the Historiography of Science.Joseph Agassi - 1996 - Foundations of Physics 26 (4):483-499.
    Legitimating the use of metaphysics in scientific research constituted a farreaching methodological revolution, invalidating the inductivist demands that science be guided by empirical information alone. Thus, science became tentative. The revolution was established when pioneering historians of science, Max Jammer among them, exhibited the working of metaphysics in scientific research. This raises many problems, since most metaphysical ideas are poor as compared with scientific ones. Yet taking science to be the effort to explain facts in a comprehensive manner, makes some (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  32. Ducks, Rabbits, and Normal Science: Recasting the Kuhn’s-Eye View of Popper’s Demarcation of Science.Deborah G. Mayo - 1996 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (2):271-290.
    Kuhn maintains that what marks the transition to a science is the ability to carry out ‘normal’ science—a practice he characterizes as abandoning the kind of testing that Popper lauds as the hallmark of science. Examining Kuhn's own contrast with Popper, I propose to recast Kuhnian normal science. Thus recast, it is seen to consist of severe and reliable tests of low-level experimental hypotheses (normal tests) and is, indeed, the place to look to demarcate science. While thereby vindicating Kuhn on (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  33. Is Science Unique?Karen Wendling - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):421-438.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. Psychoanalysis, Science, and Commonsense.Sebastian Gardner - 1995 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 2 (2):93-113.
  35. Commentary on" Psychoanalysis, Science, and Commonsense".David Snelling - 1995 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 2 (2):119-121.
  36. History and Philosophy of Science Rapprochement: Shared Methodological Framework.Dominika A. Yaneva - 1995 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 26 (1):143 - 152.
    The paper intends to identify some particular basic assumptions, approaches and means of proceeding, which are spontaneously shared by philosophers, sociologists and historians of science, besides the common interchange of meta-notions describing science. To this end, the specific subject matter, scope, meta-cognitive goals and methodological background of each of the three domains of science study is first outlined. Only two shared proceedings are further discussed in details: the objective attitude, called 'playing a stranger', and the historiographers' involvement in demarcational problem (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. The Function of Credit in Hull's Evolutionary Model of Science.Noretta Koertge - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:237 - 244.
    This paper first argues that evolutionary models of conceptual development which are patterned on Darwinian selection are unlikely to solve the demarcation problem. The persistence of myths shows that in most social environments unfalsifiable ideas are more likely to survive than ones which can be subjected to empirical scrutiny. I then analyze Hull's claims about how the credit system operates in science and conclude with him that it can perform a surprising variety of functions. However I argue that the credit (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  38. Physics, Philosophy, and Psychoanalysis. R. S. Cohen, L. Laudan.Brent Mundy - 1985 - Philosophy of Science 52 (2):318-320.
  39. The Philosopher of Science as Expert Witness.Philip L. Quinn - 1984 - In James T. Cushing, C. F. Delany & Gary M. Gutting (eds.), Science and Reality: Recent Work in the Philosophy of Science. University of Notre Dame Press.
  40. More on Creationism.Larry Laudan - 1983 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 8 (1):36-38.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  41. The Demise of the Demarcation Problem.Larry Laudan - 1983 - In Robert S. Cohen & Larry Laudan (eds.), Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis: Essays in Honor of Adolf Grünbaum. D. Reidel. pp. 111--127.
  42. Commentary: Science at the Bar-Causes for Concern.Larry Laudan - 1982 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 7 (41):16-19.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  43. Response to the Commentary: Pro Judice.Michael Ruse - 1982 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 7 (41):19-23.
  44. Analytischer Versus Konstruktiver Wissenschaftsbegriff.Harald Wohlrapp - 1975 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 6 (2):252-275.
    The paper consists of three parts. The aim of the first part is to depict the concept of science in the analytic philosophy of science to point out its characteristic defects. The second part shows how the constructive philosophy of science is able to avoid these defects by honouring not special modes of research but speicial modes of foundation of results in research with its criteria for science. The third part finally refutes the main counter-arguments of analytic philosophy of science (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  45. Plausibility and Justification in the Development of Science.Dudley Shapere - 1966 - Journal of Philosophy 63 (20):611-621.
  46. What Makes a Subject Scientific?W. B. Gallie - 1957 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 8 (30):118-139.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47. The Logic of Scientific Discovery.Karl Popper - 1934 - Routledge.
    Described by the philosopher A.J. Ayer as a work of 'great originality and power', this book revolutionized contemporary thinking on science and knowledge. Ideas such as the now legendary doctrine of 'falsificationism' electrified the scientific community, influencing even working scientists, as well as post-war philosophy. This astonishing work ranks alongside The Open Society and Its Enemies as one of Popper's most enduring books and contains insights and arguments that demand to be read to this day.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1157 citations  
  48. Sofia.Lorenzo Peña - unknown
    The main claim of this paper is that the boundary between scientific and non scientific knowledge does exist -- which means several things. First, it's not the case that anything goes: some irrationalists have been mistaken into acceptance of that wrong conclusion because they have remarked that, however the boundary might be drawn, some important scientific developments would fall afoul of the standards entitling a research practice to count as scientific. Second, the boundary is not an imaginary one, that is (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark