Science And Pseudoscience: A Comparative Analysis

Improved Essays
What is of greater value; scientific knowledge, or metaphysical beliefs? Science and metaphysics, or pseudoscience, are two different things that help us develop better understandings of the world around us. Should one hold more value than the other? Is there a scientific explanation for the human condition? Can science tell us our purpose in life? Is it foolish for an educated person to place their beliefs into myth? Where should we look for the meaning of human existence? Some of these questions have simple answers, others are more difficult. Throughout my life I have found myself walking a fine line that stretches between science and metaphysics, trying to find the balance between the two. At times I place more value into scientific …show more content…
Science deals with our understanding of the physical world around us. We use it to test theories that we’ve formed through observation. By actively testing the theories with the intent of disproving them, we gather more information that supports our idea. However, pseudoscience is a belief that is often presented as being scientific, but does not hold up against the scientific method because it cannot be tested or disproven. Popper discusses that it is an issue when someone considers pseudoscience to be a science. With pseudoscience, people often times support their theories by looking for confirmations instead of trying to test them for falsifiability. This happens because pseudoscience deals a lot with things that cannot be actively observed or measured. (199-202) Though these two are different, both science and pseudoscience hold great values towards an individual 's life. Nonetheless, I place more value in science than in myth. There is simply more information to support it. To explain, if I became sick and was given the choice of seeking medical treatment or relying solely upon prayer, I would chose medical treatment. Science gives me a factual understanding of my body. Therefore, with the information that science provides, I would have a more likely chance of being cured. Science gives us a great amount of insight towards understanding our biology, which can help …show more content…
Since science deals with the physical world, but can it explain the bigger questions of life? There is no scientific formula that can determine whether or not we as humans were placed on the Earth for a specific reason. So instead we turn to metaphysics to answer these questions. Sovacool and Brown noted that we use myths as a coping mechanism for things that we don’t understand. Understanding the reason behind the myth gives important insights to our society. For example, one myth that we have is that we will be able to find alternate fuel sources before we fully exhaust our own. Instead of dealing with the issue at hand and minimizing our energy consumption, we are trying to find new resources to support of lifestyles. (240-242) There are plenty of scientific facts that show how we’ve been depleting the Earth of its natural resources, but instead the problem at hand, we instead use the myth of finding alternate fuel sources as a coping mechanism. Sometimes it’s just easier to place your faith into something that may not be true. So is it foolish for an educated person to place their beliefs into

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    “The Mistrust of Science” by Atul Gawande is a commencement address at the California Institute of Technology. Atul Gawande calls upon the institutes graduates to take a stance and defend the common misconceptions and myths about scientific issues concerning today’s society. The commencement’s main goal was to use a logical thought process to defend the scientific evidence against common misconception. For example, Atul Gawande says “They deploy false analogies and other logical fallacies… when scientists produce one level of certainty; the pseudoscientists insist they achieve another.” Atul claims that pseudoscientists deploy a poor sense of logical reasoning to mislead the public, which cannot be backed up by hard scientific evidence. Furthermore,…

    • 366 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Science is always progressing and challenging previous ideas and religious people do not want to believe that it is happening. Not everyone has to believe in science but, adaptation to new ideas is crucial. “Today’s emerging adults in the United States have only ever known a…

    • 731 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In modern times religion and science are increasingly becoming viewed as incompatible, or at least non-overlapping. Damien Keown states that “Scientific discoveries, and theories such as evolution, have challenged many traditional Christian teachings…” at the expense of making them appear “...dogmatic, irrational, and backward-looking” (119).…

    • 1050 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kenneth Miller Critique

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Although these are both true, the latter has a much heavier weight on human society. The ground rule of science as well as what makes Western science different from other belief systems is that the answers of questions about the natural world must be derived from nature. In Miller’s book Only a Theory he states that “Once the supernatural becomes a valid element in scientific inquiry, science will cease to be an empirical search for the truth of the natural world. Like faith itself, "theistic science" will be a subjective window on the world that reflects the innermost convictions of its adherents and not the outer reality of nature, the stringent standard by which speculation and hypothesis are forged into scientific theory” (197). People believe in the supernatural through faith. Faith is believing in something although you do not have evidence for it. Scientific facts are based on evidence. Therefore faith based notions cannot be viewed as scientifically sound…

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Superstition In Dracula

    • 1546 Words
    • 7 Pages

    A large portion of the population base their entire lives and existence around the ideas discovered through science, doubting the supernatural or the possibility of higher life. What about the ideas science cannot prove or attest to? Sure, the Big Bang Theory is probable with the ability to potentially explain how the universe came to be, however it does not disprove a God or much else for that matter. Moreover, many previously widely believed scientific discoveries have proven to be incorrect. Who is to say that current theories will not be found as complete bogus? In literary work Dracula, written by Bram Stoker, a lack of superstition and belief in the western side of England, as opposed to the more eastern Transylvania, is more damaging…

    • 1546 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Science was studied in the Bible. One instance that comes to mind is the sons of Issachar. They studied time and instructed people to change based on their study and observations. This is a science. However, there are some things man has tried to explain away to discredit or prove there is a God. A few are the plagues explained as climate change, the Red Sea parting as a hurricane splitting the sea, and the darkness when Jesus died called an eclipse. I don’t believe any of these because there is no proof. Sometimes there are logical things that happen to explain the scientific side to faith. However, sometimes many can want to prove or disprove so much that things are confusing. In the case of faith, science can disprove whatever you want to disprove, including a supreme being over the earth. In the book “The World’s Wisdom” by Philip Novak, the author noted “Scholars continue to debate which of Jesus’ sayings may confidently be attributed to him and which were likely to have been placed in his mouth by his faith-inspired followers. No attempt has been made to reflect this complex and unresolved controversy.” (Novak 239) Although some of the stories and details are intermingled with embellishments, the fact for me that remains is I still believe. To me, these details are so insignificant and it has no major impact to living a life of…

    • 1364 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Dalai Lama Analysis

    • 951 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Throughout all of human history, man has been able to advance significantly in terms of technology and ideology. These advancements, along with our innate ability to utilize rational thought, were the tools we used to evolve. This evolution to the modern human was made possible by using technology to gain knowledge of things that were previously beyond our comprehension. Ideally, the more we learn, the more we know. However, when it comes to the unknown, we tend to look for answers that can be both proven and explained in a way we can comprehend. This is why it is common for people turn to science to answer many questions we encounter in our lives. However, the major flaw with science comes from the fact that it…

    • 951 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Science and religion are two different aspects of life. They both have their optimistic values and teachings, and I am stuck in the middle. There are so many extensive and adequate theories that lead me to question my own beliefs and theological virtues. Based on history and facts, it seems like the two have been in conflict ever since the very beginning. Religion is a matter of faith and science is all about rationality and finding proof, and at times one outweighs the other. Scientific truths are tentative, and what we believe is true today could be easily be proved false tomorrow by observations and experiments.…

    • 651 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Nonbelievers argue that if you believe in science there is no way that you could possibly believe in God or religion. When the creation of the world as stated in the bible contradict that of modern science it is easy to see why there would be so few scientists who believe. According to pewforum.org, only 33% of today's scientists believe in a religion. However, it is possible to be knowledgeable in both science and still believe in God.…

    • 549 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Scientific claims are proven to be true or false with evidence and through the direct application of critical thinking. Scientific claims are typically repeatable time and time again resulting in the same results.…

    • 647 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To me, science is everything. Not only is it the normal biology or psychology, it is everything that surrounds us, or is in us, even the things we ourselves do not know about. The Webster definition is “a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws” which for me that definition encompasses everything we know and learn every day. You can look around and find things that are there; a pencil, a wall, a tree. You can find things that you don’t even see; air, space, feelings. These are all things that are considered under the umbrella term of “science”. It takes specialists and fields under the term “science” to even begin to understand any of these things, as each is equally complex. These people…

    • 1204 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Science is completely about inquiry and with that said, nothing supernatural can ever be proven. Although science is very powerful in how we interpret our beliefs, it is entirely up to the individual on how they want to perceive the information that is relayed to them. Like I said before, scientist are not responsible for how we use their findings. I like to think of it as some research being an act of temptation from God to know what is right and what is wrong, especially when talking about how we came about this earth and the whole topic of evolution. Overall, I think the moral concept involved in science is important because it influences us to be more rational about our moral speculations and overall…

    • 763 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Science Vs Pseudoscience

    • 1202 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In conclusion, there are differences between science and pseudoscience, or metaphysics. Science is testable, and metaphysics aren’t. I place more value in science because of the factual knowledge it provides, but I don’t solely rely upon it. Understanding what makes me the way that I am gives me more of an ability to define myself and to understand the human condition. However science has its limitations when it comes to dealing with ultimate truths, so I rely on…

    • 1202 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The most noticeable differences between science and pseudo-science are whether or not the theory has the ability to be scientifically tested. Non-science is evidently not in the domain of science. Some examples could be the disciplines of history or the theory of ethics/morality. As distinguished earlier, there may be 3 main reactions if a scientific justification conflicts with a pseudo/non-scientific justification. But there is no all-encompassing answer that says whether we should completely support the scientific justification or the non-scientific justification, under the circumstances of each independent case. Hence it is important that within the domains of “science” we should form our own beliefs upon the evidence and support each case…

    • 1344 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Science gives us opinions, not knowledge. The particular that believes science provides knowledge surely would dispraise this belief solely. Those are who reckon with the idea that “science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge…

    • 852 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays