Evolutionary theory in the scientific curricula of public education has been scrutinized by religious societies for the better part of a century around the globe. Although Darwin’s explanation of the mechanism of evolution—the process of natural selection—is widely accepted by scientists in the United States and other industrialized nations, the U.S. has lagged behind these other countries in accepting evolutionary theory in public school curricula. The debate of what to include in textbooks and classroom lessons is one of America’s most controversial issues. The creationist worldview of life’s origins has been incorporated into science curriculum as a direct challenge to natural selection and evolutionary theory, stretching the interpretation of the First Amendment and the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution under the guise of academic freedom. The debate has reached the U.S. Supreme Court on more than one occasion. Each landmark case has resulted in the Court’s decision to keep public school science courses free of theistic explanations of the origins of life or creation of species, most specifically humankind. The battle has continued and gained momentum in recent years, even in light of the Court’s decisions. The idea of intelligent design (ID) is the latest attempt by creationists to explain the existence of life, and many state boards of education and school districts throughout the country are considering the adoption of new science curricula that include ID as an adequate alternative to evolutionary theory. In the recent federal case Kitzmiller v. The Dover Area School District Justice John E. Jones, III ruled that ID was not a science at all, and instead was a religious belief violating Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Intelligent design is considered by scientists to be pseudoscience posing as scientific principle. The scientific perspective is that unsubstantiated pseudoscientific principles create misconceptions and have a deleterious effect upon science education. It is argued herein that educational leaders must play a role in preventing cases of pseudoscience arising in public school curriculum, thus strengthening the ability of our country to produce knowledgeable scientists.

abstract: This thesis examines the role of the media and popular culture in defining the shape and scope of what we think of today as "science." As a source of cognitive authority the scientific establishment is virtually beyond dispute. The intellectual clout of science seemingly elevates it to a position outside the influence of the general population. Yet in reality the emergence and evolution of the public sphere, including popular culture, has had a profound impact on the definition and application of science. What science is and how it relates to the life of the ordinary person are hardly static concepts; the public perception of science has been molding its boundaries since at least the 18th century. During the Enlightenment "natural philosophy" was broadly accessible and integrated nicely with other forms of knowledge. As the years passed into the 19th century, however, science became increasingly professionalized and distinct, until the "Two Cultures" had fully developed. The established scientific institution distanced itself from the nonscientific community, leaving the task of communicating scientific knowledge to various popularizers, who typically operated through the media and often used the mantle of science to further their own social or political agendas. Such isolation from orthodox science forced the public to create an alternate form of science for popular consumption, a form consisting mainly of decontextualized facts, often used in contrast to other forms of thought (i.e. religion, art, or pseudoscience). However, with the recent advent of "Web 2.0" and the increasing prominence of convergence culture, the role of the public sphere is undergoing a dramatic revolution. Concepts such as "collective intelligence" are changing consumers of information into simultaneous producers, establishing vast peer networks of collaboration and enabling the public to bypass traditional sources of authority. This new hypermobility of information and empowerment of the public sphere are just now beginning to break down science's monolithic status. In many ways, it seems, we are entering a new Enlightenment. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.A. English 2012

Research suggests a significant negative relationship exists between analytical and critical thinking and epistemically unwarranted beliefs. The present study aimed to examine this relationship by measuring preference for and engagement in analytical and critical thinking, then comparing these variables with belief in conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and paranormal phenomena. The quantitative cross-sectional observational study was conducted without intervention, collecting multi-purpose data. Email invitations recruited participants (N=112) from small and large businesses, organisations, schools, independent churches, and interest groups in alternative medicine and pseudoscience. Participants were Swedish speaking and 18 years or older. Relationships between variables were tested with Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The result showed significant negative correlations between beliefs in pseudoscience and the variables rationality, rational favorability, rational ability, and engagement. In addition, rational ability had a significant negative correlation with paranormal beliefs. The result did not show significant correlations between the measured cognitive variables and belief in conspiracy theories. The results suggest that individuals disengaged from, or lacking preference for, analytical and critical thinking processes are more likely to reject established science and instead endorse pseudoscience and paranormal beliefs. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of how cognitive traits and skills are connected to epistemically unwarranted beliefs. Future research can further explore these cognitive traits and skills, because they are crucial in health promotion efforts to mitigate epistemically unwarranted beliefs. Facilitating enhanced learning environments, supporting health promotion initiatives, and enabling effective health communication will cultivate reflective, empowered, and ultimately healthier members of society.

Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2014. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Across the globe scientists are taking issue with pseudoscience, as well as the role of the media in promoting it. Articles based on pseudoscience, especially those relating to Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) that fall outside the realms of orthodox medicine, are common in all forms of media, but especially in women’s health and lifestyle magazines. Scientists are quite vociferous in their condemnation of CAM for both ethical and safety reasons, since neither the therapies nor the remedies associated with CAM practices have been proven to be efficacious, or even safe. In fact, some of the therapies and advice offered by CAM practitioners are dangerous and, in some instances, may even be life threatening. Nevertheless, the media continue to promote CAM, and the public continues to support it – despite the warnings and denunciation by scientists. This is an exploratory study to determine the prevalence of pseudoscience, generally, in South African women’s health and lifestyle magazines, and to uncover the reasons the public supports it. The magazine Longevity is used as an example of this type of publication, and a content analysis is used to illustrate the prevalence of pseudoscience articles and adverts in South African media, while field research, in the form of personal interviews, attempts to determine the reasons people support CAM in spite of its denunciation, as well as the media’s role in fostering this support. Both mainstream science and pseudoscience are described, while a literature review reveals the scientific perspective of CAM, provides examples of the more popular forms of CAM and the dangers inherent in them, as well as the ways in which science and pseudoscience in general, are handled by the media. Using the hypodermic needle theory, plus the results of the content analysis and field research, this study shows that media promote pseudoscience because it pays; the public support CAM because they believe it works; and that that belief is primarily the result of public disillusionment with the practice of orthodox medicine, rather than the result of media’s promotion of CAM, as scientists contend. / AFRIKKANSE OPSOMMING: Wetenskaplikes van regoor die wêreld het ’n probleem met pseudowetenskap, sowel as die rol wat die media speel om dit bevorder. Artikels gebaseer op pseudowetenskap, veral dié met betrekking tot Aanvullende en Alternatiewe Medisyne (AAM), wat buite die grense van ortodokse medisyne val, is algemeen in alle vorme van media, maar veral in gesondheid-en lewenstyltydskrifte vir vroue. Wetenskaplikes is baie uitgesproke in hul veroordeling van AAM om beide etiese en veiligheidsredes, omdat nóg die terapie nóg die middels wat verband hou met AAM praktyke bewys is om doeltreffend, of selfs veilig te wees. Trouens, sommige van die terapieë en advies wat aangebied word deur AAM beoefenaars is gevaarlik, en in sommige gevalle selfs lewensgevaarlik. Tog hou die media aan om AAM te bevorder, en die publiek om dit te ondersteun – ten spyte van die waarskuwings en veroordeling deur wetenskaplikes. Hierdie narvorsing is ’n verkennende studie om die voorkoms van pseudowetenskap in Suid-Afrikaanse vroue se gesondheid- en lewenstyltydskrifte te bepaal, en die redes te ontbloot waarom die publiek dit ondersteun. Die tydskrif Longevity word gebruik as ’n voorbeeld van hierdie tipe publikasie, en ’n inhoudsanalise word gebruik om die voorkoms van pseudowetenskaplike artikels en advertensies in die Suid-Afrikaanse media te illustreer, terwyl navorsing in die veld, in die vorm van persoonlike onderhoude, poog om die redes te bepaal waarom mense AAM ondersteun, ten spyte van veroordeling, sowel as die rol wat die media speel in die bevordering van hierdie ondersteuning. Beide hoofstroom wetenskap en pseudowetenskap word beskryf, terwyl ’n literatuuroorsig die wetenskaplike perspektief van AAM ontbloot, voorbeelde van die meer populêre vorme van AAM word verskaf asook van die gevare daaraan verbonde, sowel as die maniere waarop wetenskap en pseudowetenskap in die algemeen, hanteer word deur die media. Met behulp van die spuitnaald teorie, plus die resultate van die inhoudsanalise en navorsing in die veld, bewys hierdie studie dat die media pseudowetenskap bevorder, want dit betaal; die publiek ondersteun AAM omdat hulle glo dit werk; en dat daardie geloof primêr die gevolg is van openbare ontnugtering met die beoefening van ortodokse medisyne, eerder as die gevolg van die media se bevordering van AAM, soos wetenskaplikes beweer.

[pt] O tema desta pesquisa diz respeito ao problema da demarcação entre ciência e não-ciência, proposto no âmbito da filosofia da ciência anglo-saxã do século XX. O estudo do caso da astrologia mostra-se relevante para enriquecer essa discussão demarcatória e revelar suas dificuldades, considerando-se que vários filósofos da ciência, como Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend, Thagard e Laudan, usaram a astrologia como exemplo ao tentar dar conta do problema da demarcação ou problematizar essa questão. O objetivo desta dissertação é, portanto, esclarecer um pouco mais o problema da demarcação da ciência, analisando especialmente o caso da astrologia, e examinar a relevância dessa questão no contexto atual dos estudos sobre a ciência. Com essa inserção no diálogo epistemológico contemporâneo, pretende-se contribuir para um melhor entendimento não só do que é ciência e de quais são suas fronteiras, mas também para a construção de uma visão mais precisa e menos preconceituosa da astrologia. / [en] This research concerns with the demarcation problem which was proposed by the Anglo-Saxon philosophy of science in the twentieth century. Astrology as a case study is relevant to enrich this debate and to reveal its dificulties since various philosophers of science - as Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend, Thagard, and Laudan - have used astrology as an example to account for demarcation problem or to question it. Therefore the goal of this dissertation is to clarify a little bit more the problem of distinguishing science from non- science, in particular the case of astrology, and to examine the pertinence of this discussion in the current context of the science studies. This survey is inserted into the contemporary epistemological dialogue and it intends to contribute to a better understanding of what is science and which are your frontiers, as well to give a more precise and less prejudicing view of astrology.

The demarcation problem aims to articulate the boundary between science and pseudoscience. Solutions to the problem have been notably raised by the logical positivists (verificationism), Karl Popper (falsificationism), and Imre Lakatos (methodology of research programmes). Due, largely, to the conclusions drawn by Larry Laudan, in a pivotal 1981 paper which dismissed the problem of demarcation as a “pseudo-problem”, the issue was brushed aside for years. Recently, however, there has been a revival of attempts to reexamine the demarcation problem and synthesize new solutions. My aim is to survey two of the contemporary attempts and to assess these approaches over and against the broader historical trajectory of the demarcation problem. These are the efforts of Nicholas Maxwell (aim-oriented empiricism), and Paul Hoyningen-Huene (systematicity). I suggest that the main virtue of the new attempts is that they promote a self-reflexive character within the sciences. A modern demarcation criterion should be sensitive towards the dynamic character of the sciences. Using, as an example, a case study of Traditional Chinese Medicine, I also suggest that the potential for conflict between demarcation conclusions and the empirical success of a pseudoscientific discipline is problematic. I question whether it is sensible to reject, as pseudoscientific, a discipline which seems to display empirical success in cases where the rival paradigm, contemporary western medicine, is not successful. Ultimately, I argue that there are both good theoretical and good pragmatic grounds to support further investigation into a demarcation criterion and that Laudan’s dismissal of the problem was premature. / Graduate / 0422 / 0402

The demarcation problem aims to articulate the boundary between science and pseudoscience. Solutions to the problem have been notably raised by the logical positivists (verificationism), Karl Popper (falsificationism), and Imre Lakatos (methodology of research programmes). Due, largely, to the conclusions drawn by Larry Laudan, in a pivotal 1981 paper which dismissed the problem of demarcation as a “pseudo-problem”, the issue was brushed aside for years. Recently, however, there has been a revival of attempts to reexamine the demarcation problem and synthesize new solutions. My aim is to survey two of the contemporary attempts and to assess these approaches over and against the broader historical trajectory of the demarcation problem. These are the efforts of Nicholas Maxwell (aim-oriented empiricism), and Paul Hoyningen-Huene (systematicity). I suggest that the main virtue of the new attempts is that they promote a self-reflexive character within the sciences. A modern demarcation criterion should be sensitive towards the dynamic character of the sciences. Using, as an example, a case study of Traditional Chinese Medicine, I also suggest that the potential for conflict between demarcation conclusions and the empirical success of a pseudoscientific discipline is problematic. I question whether it is sensible to reject, as pseudoscientific, a discipline which seems to display empirical success in cases where the rival paradigm, contemporary western medicine, is not successful. Ultimately, I argue that there are both good theoretical and good pragmatic grounds to support further investigation into a demarcation criterion and that Laudan’s dismissal of the problem was premature. / Graduate / 0422 / 0402

No description available.

Denna studies syfte var att undersöka hur intuitivt tänkande, analytiskt tänkande, kritiskt tänkande, utbildningsnivå, tro på pseudovetenskap, utbildning, inställning till klimatforskning samt inställning till vaccin korrelerar med tro på konspirationsteorier. Studien var en kvantitativ tvärsnittsstudie där deltagare besvarade ett frågeformulär som mätte variablerna tro på konspirationsteorier, intuitivt tänkande, analytiskt tänkande, kritiskt tänkande, tro på pseudovetenskap, utbildning, inställning till klimatforskning och inställning till vaccinforskning. Insamling av data skedde via ett icke slumpmässigt bekvämlighets- samt frivillighetsurval. Deltagarna i studien (N=125) var mellan 18 och 82 år gamla (M=46.28, SD=13.48) och bestod av 75 kvinnor och 48 män samt 2 annan/vill ej uppge. Det genomfördes två analyser där resultatet visade att de två modellerna var signifikanta. Resultatet visade att variabeln tro på pseudovetenskap hade en signifikant positiv korrelation med tro på konspirationsteorier och variabeln inställning till vaccin hade en signifikant negativ korrelation med tro på konspirationsteorier. Intuitivt tänkande visades vara en signifikant prediktor utifrån ett självskatttningsformulär men inte från en mätning genom ett test. Variablerna analytiskt tänkande, kritiskt tänkande, utbildning, inställning till klimatforskning var inte signifikanta prediktorer i respektive modell. Den aktuella studiens resultat visade att en högre tro på pseudovetenskap, en högre tendens till intuitivt tänkande samt en mer negativ inställning till vaccin uppvisade högre tro på konspirationsteorier. / This study's purpose was to examine how intuitive thinking, analytical thinking, critical thinking, belief in pseudoscience, education, approach to science regarding climate and approach to science regarding vaccines correlates with belief in conspiracy theories. The study used a quantitative cross-sectional design where the participants answered a questionnaire that measured the variables intuitive thinking, analytical thinking, critical thinking, belief in pseudoscience, education, approach to science regarding climate and approach to science regarding vaccines. The data was collected through a non-randomized convenience and volunteer sampling. The participants (N=125) were aged 18 to 82 (M=46.28, SD=13.48) whereof 75 were women, 48 were men and 2 chose other/wish to not say. Two analyses were conducted where the result showed that each model was significant. The result showed that the variable belief in pseudoscience had a significant positive correlation with belief in conspiracy theories and the variable approach to vaccine had a significant negative correlation with belief in conspiracy theories. The variable intuitive thinking was shown to be a significant predictor based on a self-assessment measurement but not based on a measurement through a cognitive reflection test. Analytical thinking, education, critical thinking and approach to science regarding climate were not significant predictors in each model. The result showed that a higher level of belief in pseudoscience, a higher tendency to use intuitive thinking and a negative approach to science regarding vaccine correlated with a higher belief in conspiracy theories.

本論文乃是藉由現代中醫科學研究，進一步指出中醫科學化的可能性及其問題。由於中醫理論十分駁雜，筆者將焦點主要集中於中醫脈診之上，藉由汪叔游和王唯工的研究，來討論中醫脈診科學化的可能性和問題。 本論文進行方式，主要可分為兩個步驟，首先針對傳統中醫理論地位的問題加以討論，其次乃是針對現代中醫實驗。 在第一步驟中，筆者提出一個理論作為科學理論所必須符合的最低標準，即是科學化三原則，分別是：可落實原則、主體際性原則以及系統化原則。藉由科學化三原則筆者嘗試論證傳統中醫並非是科學理論或是經驗有效的理論，最多僅能將中醫醫療實踐視為經驗有效的醫療診斷技術。 在第二步驟中，筆者藉由汪叔游和王唯工的實驗，來討論其經驗上和概念上的問題。藉由兩人的研究，筆者將進一步指出中醫科學化的過程中，必須經過理論的重新建構，而不是僅在於累積客觀的經驗資料就可證實中醫理論。