Science and pseudoscience are two subjects that continually clash and collide with each other. Many people try to use science to explain pseudoscience, when really there isn't any scientific evidence behind pseudoscience. Subjects such as palm reading, horoscopes, and other psychic capabilities try to prove that there is substantial scientific evidence behind their predictions but there is not. Many people are falling for this "false science" and therefore the masters of psuedoscience are able to use their "abilities" to make money. The psychics, palm readers, and horoscopes are big money makers today. Many people rely on and spend a lot of money on psychic advice and horoscopes. It seems to me the main thing is always be skeptical about what you are told and what you read.
Science uses experimentation and methodology to explain and prove why or how something happens. Behind any theory or law there is scientific evidence to back it up. This scientific evidence must be documented and anyone must be able to recreate the experiment and obtain the same results. The goal behind science is always to have a better understanding of the universe and the beings in it. In science there is always something new to discover and scientific knowledge is constantly expanding. With psuedoscience this is not true. The goals that drive psuedoscience are usually cultural, idealogical, or commercial, and this field has not grown or expanded since it was first instituted.
I think that science and psuedoscience walk on a very thin line between each other. It is easy for people to claim that psuedoscience is science because they are so close to each other. We all are faced with psuedoscience and must learn how to identify it. I have just heard about a man that claims he is pregnant on the news, and it's in debat whether this is real science or psuedoscience. It turns out that he is truly pregnant, but he was born a woman and had a sex change later in life. So technically in this case it's a little bit of psuedoscience with science because someone actually born male cannot bare a child, but with today's technology someone technically a male can have a child. What do you think about that?
8 comments:
Jamie, I loved the last little bit of insight. It really gives a good reference to what the world will actually believe. Great job.
Billy
I think you did an excellent job at comparing science and pseudoscience. I also liked how you touched on how much pseudoscience is capitalized upon and how willing our society is to spend their money on something that has no substantial evidence to support it.
Jamie-
Excellent posting. Question: So what would psychology and theology be considered - Science or psuedoscience?
I think this was a great post. The people in pseudoscience like the palm readers, those kind of people, are really making a lot of money of false information like you had said. But Good Job
the one and only
Nick
i thought this was a really interesting one jamie. probably because you used examples that we've heard of. i liked the way you wrote it too, the style i suppose. nice
Hey jamie, I really understood the things you were talking about. Way to catch attention with the story at the end. I can't believe that, so that guy can really give birth to a baby? How is that possible?
I agree with your view on the topic. Also i like how you added the hermaphrodite as a little more insight.
-Dustin
i love how your opinion is 100 percent truthful. i didn't really read your contrasts because once you read one you've read them all, but i really like your opinion.
camo
Post a Comment