Science and Pseudo-Science
Updated 2026-09-10
INTRODUCTION
English translation pending.
CORE DEFINITION
The problem of distinguishing science from pseudo-science is part of the larger task of judging which beliefs are epistemically warranted. The entry clarifies the special character of pseudo-science relative to other unscientific doctrines and practices, including science denialism and resistance to facts, and examines the major criteria of demarcation, such as falsifiability and the presence of a doctrinal component.
SCAFFOLDING EFFECT
Reduce cognitive load
- Doctrine screening: look not at whether conclusions are right or wrong, but at whether a self-correction mechanism lets evidence overturn doctrine. - Argument checkup: check for evasion of testing, appeal to authority, or unfalsifiable claims.
Anchor fast decisions
The hallmark of pseudo-science is not false conclusions, since science also errs often, but the absence of a self-correcting epistemic mechanism: placing doctrine above evidence, evading tests, and appealing to authority and unfalsifiable claims. Demarcation is difficult because scientific methods are themselves historical and variable, so any single criterion produces counterexamples.
MINIMUM ACTION
In progress 0/1Practice this model in one real situation:
account_treeGenealogyexpand_more
menu_bookReferencesexpand_more
Source support: Explicit
- plato.stanford.eduhttps://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/verified
PRIVATE NOTES · Only visible to you
SAVED Q&A
ENTRY Q&A · Private saving available
Ask with a clear boundary
thinkingmodels answers from published entry context only.
Your question is sent to thinkingmodels. The answer uses public entry context only.
RELATED MODELS