Distinguish between Genuine Science and Marginal Science


Add to cart
Essay #: 067373
Total text length is 4,773 characters (approximately 3.3 pages).

Excerpts from the Paper

The beginning:
Distinguish between Genuine Science and Marginal Science
This paper will argue that a demarcation between science and marginal science is possible based on analysis of the data. This will be accomplished through use of Giere’s six-step analysis (Giere, 2005). What defines ‘science’ and what defines ‘pseudo-science’? Giere states that “…science involves experimentation and pseudoscience lacks experiments” (Giere, 2005, p.1). Using this criteria, along with the six-step analysis, Giere asks “…whether the data cited do or do not provide evidence for a proposed hypothesis” (Giere, 2005, p.1).
It is the view of this paper that the analysis of data will determine if a given activity is scientific or if it is pseudo scientific. The question then...
The end:
.....ne is from the past based on what is said? There is literally no physical evidence to support this theory.
In terms of something that is more scientifically substantive, Giere gives the example and analysis of the child Hans who develops a fear of horses. Through deduction using the six-step analysis, Giere gives some credence to the scientific methodology, but we are still uncertain regarding “the fit of Frauds hypotheses to the real world…” (Giere, 2005, p.96).
To conclude, it is difficult to have conclusive proof in many cases, but there is a distinct difference in the quality of the data between scientific theories and psuedo-scientific theories.
Works Cited
Giere, R. N. (2005). Understanding Scientific Reasonings. Wadsworth Publishing.