An examination of unscientific theories

Millions, possibly billions, of people have come to believe what is essentially a conspiracy theory, generating fear and misunderstanding about a whole class of technologies on an unprecedentedly global scale. This matters enormously because these technologies — in particular the various uses of molecular biology to enhance plant breeding potential — are clearly some of our most important tools for addressing food security and future environmental change. This is what has happened with the GMOs food scare in Europe, Africa and many other parts of the world.

An examination of unscientific theories

The Nibiru cataclysm is a supposed disastrous encounter between the Earth and a large planetary object (either a collision or a near-miss) which certain groups believe will take place in the early 21st yunusemremert.comers in this doomsday event usually refer to this object as Nibiru or Planet idea was first put forward in by Nancy Lieder, founder of the website ZetaTalk. Piaget’s Theory and his contribution to understanding the development of moral judgement The discussion so far of Piaget’s theory has touched more the physical and mental attributes that alter between each stage, though it is clear the development of abstract thought and the recognition of future consequences are of course an important factor in any moral adjudication. Chris Mooney is the author of The Republican War on Science and Storm World.A Knight fellow in science journalism at MIT, he contributes to many publications, including Mother Jones, Wired, the Boston Globe, and lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

The way that the issue is presented in the book seems to suggest that philosophy is in a position above the debate, perhaps as a judge, which looks down upon the various disciplines, inspects them, and labels them as science or non-science.

However, I feel that philosophy has its place within this debate, not only as something which may make demarcations, but also as something which may be the subject of demarcations. There is one similarity among Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos, Thagard and Ruse which I am critical of; they all seem to hide behind a common word: He can then use this criterion to label any theory as science or non-science.

My question to that is, should a theory criterion of scientific demarcation be subject to its own criteria, ensuring that it is a scientific theory in itself? Would Popper call Lakatos a pseudoscientist for erroneously using probability a scientific tool as demarcation?

When confronted with this statement, would Lakatos accept that his methods are pseudo-scientific and willingly take the label, or would he change his methods to conform to a different label?

Finally, I think it is interesting to view the overall study of demarcation through the eyes of the demarcation criterion.

As we progress from Popper to Ruse, these philosophers seem to use a progressive, puzzle-solving method to attempt to find the ideal criteria. Some of their ideas a falsifiable, others are not. Each philosopher has his own psychology, but there is also an overlying philosophical community programme which is pushing the demarcation criteria forward.

Could one argue that the demarcation process is, in itself, a science? This entry was posted in Science vs. Bryana- You said it even better than I did.

Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments - Wikipedia

Brian- Contrary to what my post might have suggested, I absolutely agree with you that philosophy is not a science and does not even attempt to call itself one although I still see strong parallels between the two.

I do, however, still hold my criticism of our philosophers. Who watches the watchmen? I also think you brought up another very interesting point.

With all the time we have spent in class arguing over the definition of science, no one has suggested simply looking in the dictionary.

This brings up an idea which we had discussed in class: Mark- The precise definition of theory may be just as slippery as the definition of science. One could probably argue that anything from a speculation, idea, guess, or hypothesis could be counted as a theory.

In the context of my post, I define a theory as any claim put forth by an individual or group which attempts to explain or characterize something.Sigmund Freud emphasized the importance of the unconscious mind, and a primary assumption of Freudian theory is that the unconscious mind governs behavior to a greater degree than people suspect.

For example, the unconscious mind is difficult to test and measure objectively.

An examination of unscientific theories

Overall, Freud's theory is highly unscientific. Despite the. Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments ; Titlepage, first edition. Author: Søren Kierkegaard: Original title: And that encounter between system and anti-system is very relevant to any examination of philosophical theology to-day.

Certainly Tillich, who is often critical of Hegel, nearly always speaks in praise of Publisher: University bookshop Reitzel, Copenhagen. Evolution is just unscientific. It violates the laws of chemistry including the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the laws of probability, and information theory.

Anti-creationists commonly charge creationists with misusing the Second Law of Thermodynamics, saying that an .

"The Mind as the Software of the Brain" by Ned Block

Spin Doctors: The Chiropractic Industry Under Examination [Paul Benedetti, Wayne MacPhail, Dr. Stephen Barrett, Dr. Brad Stewart] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Canadians visit chiropractors about 30 million times a year, and surveys show that patients are generally satisfied with their treatment.

But studies also show that as many as two hundred Canadians a year suffer.

An examination of unscientific theories

Basically criticisms point out that children's cognitive development is far more complex than Piaget had thought. Despite the critics, an examination of Piaget's theory shows that his theory is remarkably consistent, coherent, and comprehensive.

However, research suggests that Piaget;s system may not reflect the facts accurately. Now Popper’s theory is only a scientific theory if it can be falsified, i.e. if we can find a scientific theory that cannot be falsified.

This seems a bit awkward considering that the status of Popper’s theory is dependent on the status of Popper’s theory which depends on Popper’s theory (and so on).

Time to call out the anti-GMO conspiracy theory – Mark Lynas