Pseudoskeptismi
Wikipedia
Pseudoskeptismillä tarkoitetaan sairaalloista, liiallista tai haitallista skeptismiä.[1] Illinoisin yliopiston filosofian professori Frederick L. Will käytti ensimmäisen kerran termiä pseudoskeptismi vuonna 1942. Termin teki tunnetuksi Eastern Michigan Universityn sosiologian professori, entinen skeptikko Marcello Truzzi vuonna 1987, vastauksessaan skeptikkoryhmille jotka kutsuivat 'pseudotieteeksi' aloja, joita Truzzi mieluummin nimitti esitieteeksi. Truzzi kirjoitti vuonna 1987:
- Koska skeptismi oikeastaan viittaa epäilyyn ennemmin kuin kieltämiseen - epäuskoon ennemmin kuin uskoon - kriitikot jotka ennemmin ottavat negatiivisen kuin agnostisen kannan ja silti kutsuvat itseään skeptikoiksi, ovat oikeastaan pseudoskeptikoita.[2]
[muokkaa] Pseudoskeptismin tunnusmerkkejä
Truzzi on määritellyt muun muassa seuraavat pseudoskeptisyyden tunnusmerkit:
- Taipumus kieltämiseen ennemmin kuin epäilyyn [3]
- Valikoiva kriittisyys [4]
- Tuomitseminen ilman kattavaa tutkimusta [5]
- Taipumus maineen likaamiseen, ennemmin kuin tutkimukseen[6]
- Pilkkaaminen ja henkilöä vastaan hyökkääminen [7]
- Oletus että arvostelu ei vaadi todistusta [8]
- Vastaväitteet jotka perustuvat ennemmin uskottavuuteen kuin empiiriseen todistusaineistoon [9]
- Esittäjien halventava luokittelu 'edistäjiksi', 'pseudotieteilijöiksi' tai 'patologisen tieteen harjoittajiksi'. [10]
- Vahvistamattomien vastaväitteiden tekeminen[11]
[muokkaa] Aiheesta muualla
- Skeptismi ja psi - tiedettä vai turhaumia?
- Tietoisku "skepsismistä"
- Truzzi, Marcello, "On Pseudo-Skepticism". Anomalist. (Commentary)
- Truzzi, Marcello, "On Some Unfair Practices towards Claims of the Paranormal". Oxymoron, 1998
- Drasin, Daniel, "Zen and the Art of Debunkery". aol.com, 1997.
- Milton, Richard, "Scientific skepticism".
- Mooney, Chris, "Abuses of Skepticism : Doubting is a powerful tool, but it can definitely be taken too far". CSICOP, December, 2003.
- Haack, Susan, "Science, Scientism, and Anti-Science in the Age of Preposterism". CSICOP, December 1997.
- Sofka, Michael D., "Myths of Skepticism". ISUNY, March, 2002.
- Beaty, William J., "Symptoms of Pathological Sketicism". 1996.
- Hyman, Ray, "Proper Criticism". (csicop.org)
- Martin, Brian, "Strategies for dissenting scientists". Society for Scientific Exploration. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Volume 12 No 4. 1998. (PDF)
- Baez, John, "The crackpot index : Method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics.".
- Kruger, Justin, and David Dunning "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments". Department of Psychology, Cornell University.
- Debunking Pseudo-Skeptical Arguments against Paranormal and Psychic Phenomena by Winston Wu
- Wilson, Robert Anton, interview in which he discusses CSICOP and pseudoskeptism, what he calls "irrational rationalists" and "fundamentalist materialism"
- Skepdic article on pseudo-skeptics, discussing the fallacious labeling of skeptics as "pseudo-skeptics".
- Sarma, Amardeo, Misguided Stigmatization of "Organized Skepticism"
[muokkaa] Viittaukset
- ↑ L. David Leiter, "The Pathology of Organized Skepticism" (PDF), in Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 125–128, 2002. "... it is important to clarify a basic difference, the difference between ordinary (individual) skepticism and organized skepticism. This paper does not take issue with ordinary skepticism, which is seen as a useful and important human trait ... However, organized skepticism appears to be something very different: it might be called, in the words of Ed Storms, pathological skepticism; or in the words of Marcello Truzzi, pseudoskepticism."
- ↑ "Marcello Truzzi, On Pseudo-Skepticism" Zetetic Scholar (1987) No. 12/13, 3-4.
- ↑ "Marcello Truzzi, On Pseudo-Skepticism" Zetetic Scholar (1987) No. 12/13, 3-4. "Though many in this category who dismiss and ridicule anomaly claims call themselves "skeptics," they often are really "pseudo-skeptics" because they deny rather than doubt anomaly claims"
- ↑ Truzzi, ibid, ".. they seem less inclined to take the same critical stance towards orthodox theories. For example, they may attack alternative methods in medicine (e.g., for a lack of double-blind studies) while ignoring that similar criticisms can be levelled against much conventional medicine"
- ↑ Truzzi, ibid, "those I term scoffers often make judgements without full inquiry"
- ↑ Hyman, Ray, 1980. "Pathological Science: Towards a Proper Diagnosis and Remedy," Zetetic Scholar, No. 6, 31-43. Truzzi wrote: ".. they may be more interested in discrediting an anomaly claim than in dispassionately investigating it"
- ↑ Truzzi, ibid, "scoffers sometimes manage to discredit anomaly claims (e.g., through ridicule or ad hominem attacks) "
- ↑ Marcello Truzzi, "On Pseudo-Skepticism]", Zetetic Scholar, #12-13, 1987. "Critics who assert negative claims, but who mistakenly call themselves "skeptics," often act as though they have no burden of proof placed on them at all, though such a stance would be appropriate only for the agnostic or true skeptic"
- ↑ Truzzi, ibid, ".. many critics seem to feel it is only necessary to present a case for their counter-claims based upon plausibility rather than empirical evidence"
- ↑ Truzzi, ibid, "A characteristic of many scoffers is their pejorative characterization of proponents as "promoters" and sometimes even the most protoscientific anomaly claimants are labelled as 'pseudoscientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science.' "
- ↑ Truzzi, ibid, ".. the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of 'conventional science' as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis — saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact — he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof."
