The Value of Science and Empiricism

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

The allan socalled hoax, in which he showed a lot of ine spances, or gibria 94, was published. But what does it prove? That's harder to say. The grievance studies attempt about five years ago to do this as well failed to get much of their stuff printed. And they got revised and resubmits over and over again. i would be curious to know, to know as why. A, because i wonder how it would do. B, it's impossible to tell. Now, right? We only have an and of one. Ah, and let's see if we can investigate a little bit how we've decided what that boundary is.

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.