Belief Buddies versus Critical Communities
Belief Buddies versus Critical Communities
The Social Organization of Pseudoscience
Philosophers of science have attempted to explain what is wrong with pseudoscience, first, by contrasting the structure of its claims with that of legitimate scientific hypotheses, and second, by comparing the typical reasoning patterns of pseudoscientists with the norms of scientific reasoning. This chapter proposes an additional difference. It argues that typical science can be distinguished from typical pseudoscience by the presence of critical communities, institutions that foster communication and criticism through conferences, journals, and peer review. These well-organized critical communities supplement the efforts of individual scientists by promoting both positive and negative feedback. Pseudoscientists, on the other hand, feeling the stigma attached to their beliefs, often seek out only supportive allies.
Keywords: science, pseudoscience, peer reviews, pseudoscientists, scientists
Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
