Paranauka is the study of objects that go beyond the scope of traditional science, because they cannot be explained by accepted scientific theory or verified by conventional scientific methods. This study may be related to phenomena that are supposed to go beyond the scope of scientific research or for which there is no scientific explanation.
Alternative science
Paranauka is what is commonly regarded as unorthodox or unacceptable by the scientific community, but "alternative" sciences nevertheless cause some interest in society, otherwise there would not be so many. And how many pseudo-scientific knowledge, rejected at a certain stage of history, have nevertheless justified themselves over time?
Let us give an example of paranoscience, which defended its right to exist. In the early 1800s, a union of scientists of the time claimed that there were no “rocks” in space. Therefore, the existence of meteorites was a forbidden theory, and any discovery or observation of fallen iron-rich stones was nothing more than just useless peasant superstitions. At that time, “meteorites” were in the same area of pseudoscience as modern UFO abductions and Yeti observations.
In the end, it was discovered that the opinion of the scientific mainstream was fundamentally wrong: meteorites exist. This is just as true as the claim that the Earth is spinning, although the great scientist Galileo Galilei was once burned for this dissent. Can study meteorites be considered one of the types of pseudoscience? Of course not. They were real, although the scientific community desecrated their existence and called it superstitious stupidity. Paranoscience is something or not, or there is simply no reliable evidence that is actually true knowledge.
Science and Paranauka
Another example: at the turn of the century, the creation of submersible aircraft, as you know, was impossible without the use of modern technology. Dr. S. Newcomb proved this, and the scientific community regarded the inventors of “flying machines” as charlatans. Therefore, Langley and the Wright Brothers did not practice “science,” since the exploits they tried to accomplish were previously declared impossible. Very few scientists of that time would consider their efforts as having anything to do with legitimate science.
However, decades have proved that the opinion of the scientific world was erroneous, and aerodynamics was no longer a false science, paranoscience, pseudoscience, as was thought of in 1900. Even in 1906, after the success of the Wright brothers, American scientists still ridiculed aircraft, and the inventors themselves were considered liars. On the other hand, if the laws of nature were a little different, and if Wright were simply deceiving themselves, then today airplanes would be nothing more than myths, and their work would now be classified as stupidity.
Therefore, if the huge bipedal inhuman primates really occupy the forests of Oregon and Washington, then those who study Bigfoot are parascientists. But if such creatures do not exist, then their study is pseudoscience. The same applies to the various parts of parapsychology, the study of antigravity, the pursuit of zero-point energy machines, etc. Maybe they will ultimately be considered valid science, but this is not the case at present. This can only be shown by time, if they do not pass this test, then even in the future they will be considered pseudosciences.
Deny parascience - discourage progress?
Obviously, there is a problem here: rarely, but sometimes new areas of research that were once widely regarded as pseudoscience are later confirmed. Only looking back, only after a certain field has become successful, can such conclusions be drawn. Scientists who once considered space travel and continental drift with contempt now appear to be dark fools who at one time hindered progress.
Most modern scientists hope to eliminate the unknown by applying the stigma of pseudoscience to everything beyond legal knowledge. Is this reasonable? Who knows? This, apparently, is based on intolerance for new ideas and the fear of being mistaken in the bias of unconventional ideas. History shows that these actions have repeatedly interfered with the advancement of true knowledge. But we need not to take seriously new, yet untested and seemingly strange areas of research.
Popular pseudoscience
The following alternative sciences are known:
- alchemy;
- acupuncture;
- anthroposophy;
- astrology;
- esoterics;
- geomancy;
- occultism;
- parapsychology;
- telepathy.
Examples and objects of study of these sciences are ancient astronauts, the Bermuda Triangle, UFOs, psychokinesis, mental healing, the power of the pyramids, reincarnation, immortality, astral projection, lost continents, plant communication, orgone energy, dianetics, and so on.
For decades, subjects and proponents of occultism and pseudoscience have come and gone, and the tolerance of the public and passion for cultist theories has shifted like the wind. But by consensus, the past decade has sparked a flood of interest in what is called quasi-science. Border science, pseudoscience, paranormal phenomena, occultism, mysticism, cults of foolishness - what is it? New irrationalism or new stupidity?
Features of Paranoscience
The demarcation between science and pseudoscience is part of a larger task - determining which beliefs are epistemically justified. What is the specificity of pseudoscience in relation to other categories of unscientific doctrines and practices? The oldest known use of the word “pseudoscience” dates from 1796, when the historian James Pettit Andrew referred to alchemy as the “Fantastic Pseudoscience” (Oxford English Dictionary). The word has been used since the 1880s. Throughout its history, it has had a clearly discrediting meaning.
It would be strange if someone proudly described their activities as pseudoscience. Since a derogatory connotation is an essential characteristic of the word “pseudoscience”, an attempt to derive an invaluable definition of the term does not make sense.
Philosophy and Paranauka
The general use of the term “science” can be described as partially descriptive, partially normative. When activity is recognized as a science, it usually implies recognition of its positive role in our pursuit of knowledge. On the other hand, the concept of science was formed as a result of the historical process, and many unforeseen circumstances affect what we call or do not call science.
It is best to focus on descriptive content and indicate how the term is actually used. Alternatively, you can focus on the normative element and clarify the more fundamental meaning of the term. The latter approach was the choice of most philosophers who studied this issue. It implies a degree of idealization in relation to the general use of the term “science”.
The English word "science" is mainly used in the natural sciences and other areas of research that are considered similar to them. Consequently, political economics and sociology are considered sciences, while studies of literature and history are usually not. The corresponding German word "wissenschaft" has a much broader meaning and includes all academic specialties, including humanities. The German term has the advantage of a more adequate distinction between the type of systematic knowledge that is at stake in the conflict between science and pseudoscience.
More importantly, the natural, social and human sciences are part of the same human effort, namely systematic and critical research aimed at gaining the best understanding of the activities of nature, people and human society. The disciplines that form this community of disciplinary knowledge are becoming increasingly interdependent. Since the second half of the 20th century, integrative disciplines, such as astrophysics, evolutionary biology, biochemistry, ecology, quantum chemistry, neuroscience and game theory, have developed at tremendous speed and contributed to the unification of previously unrelated disciplines.
The conflict between science and pseudoscience
On the one side of the conflict, we find a community of knowledge disciplines that includes the natural, social, and humanities. On the other hand, there is a wide variety of movements and doctrines, such as creationism, astrology, homeopathy and Holocaust denial, which contradict the results and methods that are generally accepted in the community of knowledge disciplines.
Skepticism and Parascience
First, skepticism is a philosophical method that is based on the fact that the researcher doubts trivial truths, such as the existence of the outside world. This has been and remains a very useful method for substantiating allegedly certain beliefs. Secondly, criticism of pseudoscience is often called skepticism. This is the term most often used by organizations dedicated to the disclosure of pseudoscience. Third, opposition to scientific consensus in specific areas is sometimes called skepticism. For example, deniers of climate science often call themselves “climate skeptics.”
Is paranoscopy a dead end or a step forward?
Unwillingness to accept factual statements is a traditional criterion of pseudoscience. Philosophers and other theorists of science widely differ in their views on certain issues. The philosophical reflection on pseudoscience has generated other interesting problem areas in addition to the demarcation between science and pseudoscience.
Examples include science and religion, the nature and justification of methodological naturalism, as well as the meaning or meaninglessness of the concept of supernatural phenomena. Some of these problem areas have not yet received much philosophical attention.