Science Refutable Methodology Testability Physical basis Progressive Practical

Pseudo-Science Non-refutable Making stuff up (lack of physical basis) Not testable Unexplained Stagnant Dogmatic

Story about oralgel for teething babies. Homeopathic oralgel is basically a tube of glycerin, priced twice as much as the normal oralgel. homeopathy vs actual medicine. 1920s Vienna Karl Popper 3 main theories of the 1920s Psychoanalysis (Freud, Adler) Marxist theory of history Theory of relativity** (different from the above two theories not because it is more true, or that its evidence based and the other two arent the dividing line lies in its explanatory power.) Freud can explain anything .. no matter who comes into his office. Ex. evidence for the conspiracy is for the conspiracy, no evidence for the conspiracy is the conspiracy covering it up. Popper doubted psychoanalysis and Marxist theorys validity in science. Eddington 1912 Light will curve around large objects. A solar eclipse occurred in 1912 and Eddington went to go calculate where the light bent to versus where it would have bent without the solar eclipse. If the light stayed the same in bot situations, then the theory of relativity is wrong. Relativity cannot explain all possible results. Popper states that science is falsifiable (theories that COULD be wrong you can imagine counterevidence.) whereas non-science is not. Einsteins theory took a bold risk, it could be proven wrong if eddingtons experiment went another way. Confirmation Bias: once we have a theory in mind, we look for evidence that support the theory. Every good scientific theory is a prohibition. A good theory tells you what will not happen.

Science is a process of elimination. Ad hoc explanation is made specifically for a purpose without proper justification. Attempts to explain away its problems Popper says that pseudo science is more like myth than actual science. Why astrology is a pseudoscience? Pseudoscience ebbs and flows. In the 60s and 70s, astrology gains a large audience. In 1975, Bok, Jerome, and Kurtz (astronomists): Why Astrology is a Pseudoscience. i. it has magical origins ii. the planets are too distant for there to have any effect no explanation iii. people believe it out of longing for comfort Thagard: this isnt a good criteria of demarcation i. chemistry has magical origins as well .. chemistry was alchemy (turning lead into gold, or turning morals immortal) ii. Lots of genuine science had no explanation (How does gravity work?) iii. Psychology of belief is irrelevant does not matter why you believe something. Is it Testability? Astrology is testable it tells you what is going to happen. It is also falsifiable. Page 30. Falsification only occurs when a better theory comes along. Astrology does not advance even in the face of problems. Astrologists are wedded to astrology because of dogma. The difference between science and pseudoscience is the attitude towards theory. What makes something pseudoscientific is the attitude of the practitioners and society. Its about what happens when the theory is falsified. Is Astrology Pseudoscience i. less progressive, ii. many problems iii. community does not care Astrology does not take into account mass disasters where many people with different backgrounds suffer.