Related categories
Siblings:History/traditions: Demarcation of Science

31 found
Order:
  1. added 2020-05-15
    Institutional Degeneration of Science.Jüri Eintalu - 2019 - Philosophical Drops.
    Since Popper and Lakatos, the demarcation line between science and non-science has been considered to be one of the fundamental issues of the philosophy of science. According to Lakatos, pseudoscience is a non-science, which appears as science, using a public authority of science. 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. The science has (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. added 2020-02-09
    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   1 citation  
  3. added 2019-12-21
    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  
  4. added 2019-06-05
    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.
  5. added 2018-02-17
    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   13 citations  
  6. added 2017-01-02
    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  
  7. added 2016-10-24
    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  
  8. added 2016-03-15
    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  
  9. added 2016-03-09
    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.
  10. added 2016-03-09
    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  
  11. added 2015-09-18
    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  
  12. added 2015-09-11
    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  
  13. added 2015-08-06
    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   5 citations  
  14. added 2014-04-02
    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  
  15. added 2014-04-01
    Is Science Unique?Karen Wendling - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):421-438.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. added 2014-03-25
    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 (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  17. added 2014-03-12
    Federalism in Science — Complementarity Vs Perspectivism: Reply to Harré.Daniel Andler - 2006 - Synthese 151 (3):519 - 522.
  18. added 2014-03-12
    The Logic of Scientific Discovery.Karl Popper - 1959 - 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   1141 citations  
  19. added 2014-03-06
    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   24 citations  
  20. added 2013-12-11
    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  
  21. added 2013-11-17
    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  
  22. added 2012-07-31
    Response to the Commentary: Pro Judice.Michael Ruse - 1982 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 7 (41):19-23.
  23. added 2012-07-30
    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.
  24. added 2012-07-29
    Can’T Philosophers Tell the Difference Between Science and Religion?: Demarcation Revisited.Robert T. 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 (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  25. added 2012-07-29
    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.
  26. added 2012-07-29
    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  
  27. added 2012-07-29
    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   22 citations  
  28. added 2011-05-24
    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  
  29. added 2011-03-11
    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  
  30. added 2011-03-11
    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   13 citations  
  31. added 2011-02-08
    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.