Is the demarcation problem a philosophical pseudo-problem?
For a long time in history, philosophers of science have dedicated to the construction of a boundary between science and pseudoscience. Despite the substantial efforts putting into the demarcation problem, none of those well-known demarcation criteria successfully classify science or pseudoscience. The failure to provide a universally accepted demarcation, or at least gain acceptance from a majority of the community, leads to two assumptions: the unique features shared by all sciences are not yet found; alternatively, there is no such criteria distinguish science and pseudoscience, therefore, resulting in the fact that the demarcation problem is likely to be a pseudo-problem from a philosophical point of view.
According to Lauden, three metaphilosophical conditions should be well considered during the formulation of a demarcation criterion. Firstly, one may naturally draw attention to certain degrees of conditions that a demarcation criterion should satisfy. Any attempt to represent a dividing line between science and pseudoscience should be explicative and therefore can be applied to most paradigmatic cases. In other …show more content…
Lauden suggested that the demarcation criterion results in a set of ambiguities surrounding the scientific status of almost all statements, while every improbable statement with certain degrees of falsifibility can win assent from the falsificationism demarcation criterion. Even the flat earth theory can be demarcated as scientific in the light of empirical observations. Critics may argue that the degree of testability is what differentiates science and non-science rather than the absolute ability to be verified. Apart from the fact that there is no such comparison between two claims as scientific statements should not entail any pseudoscientific claim, testability does not entail worthiness of the claim.
For a long time in history, philosophers of science have dedicated to the construction of a boundary between science and pseudoscience. Despite the substantial efforts putting into the demarcation problem, none of those well-known demarcation criteria successfully classify science or pseudoscience. The failure to provide a universally accepted demarcation, or at least gain acceptance from a majority of the community, leads to two assumptions: the unique features shared by all sciences are not yet found; alternatively, there is no such criteria distinguish science and pseudoscience, therefore, resulting in the fact that the demarcation problem is likely to be a pseudo-problem from a philosophical point of view.
According to Lauden, three metaphilosophical conditions should be well considered during the formulation of a demarcation criterion. Firstly, one may naturally draw attention to certain degrees of conditions that a demarcation criterion should satisfy. Any attempt to represent a dividing line between science and pseudoscience should be explicative and therefore can be applied to most paradigmatic cases. In other …show more content…
Lauden suggested that the demarcation criterion results in a set of ambiguities surrounding the scientific status of almost all statements, while every improbable statement with certain degrees of falsifibility can win assent from the falsificationism demarcation criterion. Even the flat earth theory can be demarcated as scientific in the light of empirical observations. Critics may argue that the degree of testability is what differentiates science and non-science rather than the absolute ability to be verified. Apart from the fact that there is no such comparison between two claims as scientific statements should not entail any pseudoscientific claim, testability does not entail worthiness of the claim.