Science vs. Non-Science
Although Science is all around us and pervades nearly every aspect of our lives, not everything falls within the realm of Science!
For something to be considered scientific, it must meet certain critera:
For something to be considered scientific, it must meet certain critera:
|
|
*NOTE: The word "natural," in this case, does not exclude synthetic, or man-made materials derived from natural sources. For instance, scientists may engineer new chemicals or pharmaceuticals that do not occur in Nature outside of the lab. Nevertheless, once these artificial materials are invented, they exist within the natural world and are subject to natural laws, even if they are not naturally occuring.
Non-science |
Pseudoscience |
Concepts, topics, or phenomena that do not meet the criteria described above sit outside the bounds of Sciences, and may be characterized as "non-science." These would include such notable topics as religion, philosophy, ethics, aesthetics, opinions, attitudes, and any personal beliefs or belief systems. Non-science may be logical, or even "true" by certain criteria. But if something is unobservable, untestable, unpredictable, or inconsistent, or if it exists outside the natural world and does not abide by natural laws, then it is beyond the scope of scientific inquiry. It cannot be tested and therefore predictions or explanations regarding its nature, behavior, cause, or effect cannot be verified nor can they be falsified. For example, many cultures and religions around the world describe the concept of a human soul or spirit. However, since that is not something Science is able to directly test or observe, then it is considered non-science (i.e., not scientific).
|
"But, Mr. Franklin!" I can hear you saying, "I've watched shows on TV where ghost hunters used all sorts of sophisticated scientific instruments to document the paranormal!" Indeed, hucksters often try to dress-up non-science with scientific-seeming sights and sounds. They explore so-called "haunted" houses with infrared thermometers, EMF meters, anemometers, and other instruments like those shown below, on the belief that ghosts cause fluctuations in electromagnetic fields, cold spots, or breezes. The problem is, however, that none of these claims can be falsified, meaning they cannot be disproven. If a ghost hunting team fails to record any significant data, then they may claim the ghost didn't show up or wasn't powerful enough. On the other hand, any variation in data is taken as evidence that suggests the presence of a ghost! There's no way to disprove the existence of ghosts beyond pointing out the lack of strong evidence.
|
If, through rigorous, controlled testing, some paranormal researchers began to gather hard, verifiable data that was reproducible and withstood critical examination by other scientists, then we might begin to give ghost hunting a second thought. At that point, we may begin to regard the study of spirits as protoscience (proto- meaning "early" or "before"). Protoscience is considered to be an emerging or new subject of study that may meet many of the criteria outline above, or may appear promising, but falls short in one or more important ways. In other words, it comes close to being real science, but it's not there yet.
For example, extrasensory perception (ESP) and mental telepathy are concepts that have been studied with some degree of rigor. While some interesting data has been gathered by some researchers and interesting findings have been suggested by others, conclusions have not proved to be reliable, consistent, or reproducible. For those reasons, among others, it has not stood up to peer review, and may therefore be considered a "fringe" or protoscience (if not pseudoscience or outright non-science). Similarly, herbal and traditional medicine has not been sufficiently documented to classify as science, and remains on the cusp of wider acceptance within the scientific field.
For example, extrasensory perception (ESP) and mental telepathy are concepts that have been studied with some degree of rigor. While some interesting data has been gathered by some researchers and interesting findings have been suggested by others, conclusions have not proved to be reliable, consistent, or reproducible. For those reasons, among others, it has not stood up to peer review, and may therefore be considered a "fringe" or protoscience (if not pseudoscience or outright non-science). Similarly, herbal and traditional medicine has not been sufficiently documented to classify as science, and remains on the cusp of wider acceptance within the scientific field.