Micheal d. Gordon is the rosengarten professor of modern and contemporary history at Princeton University. He specializes in the history of modern science in russia, europe and north America. His new book is on the fringe, where science meets pseudo science. We discuss issues such as how we put our trust in scientists or don't cause they don't always get it right.
Everyone has heard of the term “pseudoscience”, typically used to describe something that looks like science, but is somehow false, misleading, or unproven. Many would be able to agree on a list of things that fall under its umbrella — astrology, phrenology, UFOlogy, creationism, and eugenics might come to mind. But defining what makes these fields “pseudo” is a far more complex issue. Given the virulence of contemporary disputes over the denial of climate change and anti-vaccination movements — both of which display allegations of “pseudoscience” on all sides — there is a clear need to better understand issues of scientific demarcation. Shermer and Gordin explore the philosophical and historical attempts to address this problem of demarcation.