Notices
Results 1 to 31 of 31
Like Tree6Likes
  • 1 Post By Strange
  • 1 Post By PhDemon
  • 2 Post By scoobydoo1
  • 1 Post By TridentBlue
  • 1 Post By grmpysmrf

Thread: Just curious

  1. #1 Just curious 
    not ADM!N grmpysmrf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,564
    has there ever been a science that started out as "pseudoscience" and then actually made its way into the realm of scientifically accepted? Maybe like alchemy or something?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor scoobydoo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by grmpysmrf View Post
    has there ever been a science that started out as "pseudoscience" and then actually made its way into the realm of scientifically accepted? Maybe like alchemy or something?
    Perhaps not "pseudoscience" per se, but I have read that those branches that eventually became mainstream sciences were described as protoscience. The developments that led to what has become the history of chemistry is a prime example if I'm not mistaken.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    There are certainly ideas that started out as being considered "wrong" by almost everybody but later turned out to be correct. (*) But that isn't necessarily pseudo-science. Pseudo-science is not just an idea which is wrong, it is about the approach to the idea being non-scientific (or even anti-scientific). Pseudo-science will pick and choose evidence, ignoring that which doesn't it. It will either avoid math or misuse it.

    Basically, pseudo-science starts with an idea and then looks for evidence to confirm it. They will let nothing disprove their idea. (A scientific hypothesis starts with evidence, proposes an idea to explain it and then looks for more evidence to prove it wrong.) So a pseudo-scientific idea might turn out to be correct but not for the right reason (in the same way that a broken clock occasionally tells the right time). But most pseudo-scientists seem to cling to old ideas that have been pretty definitively ruled out by existing evidence. It would have to be something completely speculative, that there is no existing scientific theory for, to have a chance of one day being found to be correct. But I can't think of any examples of this.

    Pseudo-science is also different from fringe science, which can mean good science on the margins of what is generally accepted. For example, respectable labs have done some limited research into the possibilities of warp drives or antigravity.

    The work on alchemy eventually turned into chemistry simply because with all their experimenting and trying things out, they occasionally got some useful results. That is more a process of evolving from non-scientific playing about to proper scientific method. If there was no scientific method at the time, I don't think it is fair to classify what was done as pseudo-science. (But anyone advocating alchemy today would definitely be a pseudo-scientist!)

    (*) I suppose the prime example is continental drift. We all noticed as kids that the shapes of some of the continents looked as if they should join up like jigsaw pieces. People had been trying to make sense of this for centuries, including suggestions that the continents might move. Wegener put together a lot of the evidence known at the time (inclduing that which contradicted the existing hypothesis of land bridges between continents). But the ideas was still not accepted - partly because no one could imagine mechanism for moving continents around and partly because Wegener wasn't a geologist. But his evidence gathering, etc. made it a scientific idea.
    sir ir r aj likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Talk to a chemist.

    The Man was into alchemy before chemistry was a science. Uh... Isaac Newton I mean.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,487
    As Strange said, pseudoscience is more about the methodology than the idea. The scientific method, and why it is important, has been outlined countless times on the forum, have a look around and you'll find a good description of it (probably by Strange again). For a prime example of pseudoscience highlighting all of the methodological flaws discussed by Strange see this thread:

    The updated Theory for the universe!

    or any of the push gravity or aether theories on the forum.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor scoobydoo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    For a prime example of pseudoscience highlighting all of the methodological flaws discussed by Strange see this thread:

    The updated Theory for the universe!
    While I applaud your efforts in having pointing us to an example, I can't help but feel an itch to give you a dislike for allowing me the opportunity to read some of the content in that thread. I think "OMG " pretty much sums up my reaction to the updated theory thread.
    Dywyddyr and PhDemon like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Maybe psychiatry. I have to give it a maybe because I am not really sure if it is a science yet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Maybe psychiatry. I have to give it a maybe because I am not really sure if it is a science yet.
    Good example. I think much of Freud's work could fall into the pseudo-science category. Psychiatry, and psychology more so, is making great strides in becoming more scientific but hasn't yet eliminated the fringe elements.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Junior TridentBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by grmpysmrf View Post
    has there ever been a science that started out as "pseudoscience" and then actually made its way into the realm of scientifically accepted? Maybe like alchemy or something?
    Absolutely, Quantum mechanics. In the Soviet Union. Here's the link:
    Suppressed research in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The political elites thought that the message it gave was too destructive to the Communist narrative they were trying to pursue. But some top guys convinced them (correctly) their problems would disrupt the nuclear program, and they let it go.

    There is a constant struggle between the political attempts to define reality, and the open minded scientific search for reality. That's what makes science vital, alive, and amazing. Everything we thought we know can be turned on its head in an instant - whether the powers that be like that or not.
    dan hunter likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Maybe psychiatry. I have to give it a maybe because I am not really sure if it is a science yet.
    Good example. I think much of Freud's work could fall into the pseudo-science category. Psychiatry, and psychology more so, is making great strides in becoming more scientific but hasn't yet eliminated the fringe elements.
    And your post is an insult to people who try.

    After a century of work, please shut up.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    And your post is an insult to people who try.
    It wasn't intended to be, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. There are many (most, probably) who are now treating psychology and psychiatry as science. I think that is great and has produced genuinely useful results.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    And your post is an insult to people who try.
    It wasn't intended to be, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. There are many (most, probably) who are now treating psychology and psychiatry as science. I think that is great and has produced genuinely useful results.
    Whatever.

    I just got a PM from a mod and now see that your the first one to want to take a dump on me for liking Freud.

    I could go through the whole thread again.... But if you've got mods that are already biased.

    Have not read Dawkins...
    Last edited by Beer w/Straw; February 1st, 2014 at 11:41 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    your the first one to want to take a dump on me for liking Freud.
    I didn't criticise you, or anyone, for liking Freud. Just pointed out that his approach wasn't scientific. Just stuff he made up. Some of it, inevitably, has been confirmed and much hasn't. <shrug> Not something I have string feelings about.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    It's arrogant and stupid to dismiss everything that is not a mathematical science; it is still science.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    It's arrogant and stupid to dismiss everything that is not a mathematical science; it is still science.
    The failings in his approach had nothing to do with the absence of mathematics. I know of no competent, current psychologist who would approve his methodology. Do you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    This thread was about science and pseudoscience...

    Ban me now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    It's arrogant and stupid to dismiss everything that is not a mathematical science; it is still science.
    Who said anything about mathematics? But, in fact, modern psychology (and psychiatry) do use mathematics.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Uh... I could pick through everything I said in that thread, but apperently that was never good enough for anyone.

    And duh, you don't respect psychology as a science.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    And duh, you don't respect psychology as a science.
    I do. That's the point. It is a science (now). It wasn't always (obviously).
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    I took a lot of offense to the PM from a moderator.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    not ADM!N grmpysmrf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw
    your the first one to want to take a dump on me for liking Freud.l
    So what? Why do you need approval for the people you like? If you like him, who cares what anyone else has to say on the subject?
    I will point out though, that simply liking somebody doesn't give them universal credibility, so you're gonna have to get thicker skin, cause there are bound to be many things in life that you like that others won't.

    May I present Ancient Aliens?I really like that show. I know many here do not. Doesn't stop me from liking it. Why do I care? and why do you?
    John Galt likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    I am more used to the indifference of another moderator.

    One that probably views PM's as useless because an open forum is much better.

    So, I feel threatened by a PM from a moderator.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    not ADM!N grmpysmrf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    I am more used to the indifference of another moderator.

    One that probably views PM's as useless because an open forum is much better.

    So, I feel threatened by a PM from a moderator.
    Without knowing the exact message of the PM I may be able to guess it was more about the hostility coming out of you rather than the subject of your posts.
    two things:
    #1 if you're gonna bring Freud up others have the right to post their feelings on the man so be ready for negative posts.
    #2 just don't bring him up anymore or if you do get ready for the backlash and ignore it or calmly refute it.

    ... Let whomever talk as bad as they want to about it. You are not the psychology sentry, some people don't dig on Psychology it's not your job to convert them or even get mad over it. Let it go. You like it and respect it, that's all that matters.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post

    .... I just got a PM from a mod and now see that your the first one to want to take a dump on me for liking Freud.

    I could go through the whole thread again.... But if you've got mods that are already biased.

    Have not read Dawkins...
    Gee, you are starting to sound a bit paranoid there! You shouldn't be so sensitive! I think you need a hug to make you feel better.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    You mean the moderator is a coward.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Projection?
    LOL!

    Psychology depends on experiments for verification but psychiatry still depends too much on annecdotes and untested assumptions.
    Yeah, this is why I have my doubts about psychiatry being a science.
    Last edited by dan hunter; February 2nd, 2014 at 02:32 PM. Reason: a misspelling confused the post's meaning
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Um.. OK

    But I had more of a feeling of being banned from this forum. Aside from whatever your post was.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    not ADM!N grmpysmrf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Projection?
    LOL!

    Psychology depends on experiments for verification but psychiatry still depends too much on annecdotes and untested assumptions.
    Yeah, this is why I have my doubts about psychiatry being a science.
    I think you have these backwards. Psychiatrists are medical doctors that basically dabble in psychology. whereas Psychologists are all theory with no medical degree.
    psychiatrists have the ability to prescribe medication where psychologists don't
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    not ADM!N grmpysmrf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    You mean the moderator is a coward.
    What???
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    not ADM!N grmpysmrf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    Um.. OK

    But I had more of a feeling of being banned from this forum. Aside from whatever your post was.
    For what?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,449
    Quote Originally Posted by TridentBlue View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by grmpysmrf View Post
    has there ever been a science that started out as "pseudoscience" and then actually made its way into the realm of scientifically accepted? Maybe like alchemy or something?
    Absolutely, Quantum mechanics. In the Soviet Union. Here's the link:
    Suppressed research in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The political elites thought that the message it gave was too destructive to the Communist narrative they were trying to pursue. But some top guys convinced them (correctly) their problems would disrupt the nuclear program, and they let it go.

    There is a constant struggle between the political attempts to define reality, and the open minded scientific search for reality. That's what makes science vital, alive, and amazing. Everything we thought we know can be turned on its head in an instant - whether the powers that be like that or not.
    Eh? How is this an example of a pseudoscience turning into a science.

    There certainly were pseudosciences promoted under Stalin for a while, but none of these has survived, because they didn't work.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. new and curious
    By klickitat in forum Introductions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: September 30th, 2013, 12:27 AM
  2. Curious ?
    By xXplosionZz in forum Physics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: November 17th, 2012, 12:50 AM
  3. just curious
    By chenopodium in forum Introductions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 3rd, 2012, 08:08 PM
  4. Curious.
    By Scarlet Rapture in forum Education
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 8th, 2006, 12:32 AM
  5. Curious
    By Ashton in forum Chemistry
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 24th, 2006, 08:37 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •