Important terms and exam questions to study for Philosophy of Sciences and
Ethics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (AB_1217)
Study these well, and you will be guaranteed to pass your exam!
To make an argument is to give a set of: ---> reasons (premises).
The function of premises is to: ---> support the conclusion.
What is pseudoscience? ---> A claim, belief or practice which is presented as
scientific (i.e. it POSES as it would be science), but which does not follow the
scientific method.
What is the main condition of something being pseudoscience? ---> Non-science
posing as science.
How does methodology differ in science vs. pseudo-science? ---> Science follows
the scientific method, a systematic and evidence-based approach to understanding
the natural world. It involves making observations, formulating hypotheses,
conducting experiments, and analyzing data to arrive at conclusions.
Pseudo-science, on the other hand, lacks a rigorous and empirical methodology. It
often relies on anecdotal evidence, personal testimonies, or unverified claims.
How does falsifiability differ in science vs. pseudo-science? ---> Scientific theories
and hypotheses are formulated in a way that allows them to be tested and potentially
falsified. This means that scientists actively seek evidence that could disprove their
theories.
In contrast, pseudo-scientific claims tend to be unfalsifiable or resistant to being
disproven. Pseudo-scientific ideas often rely on vague or ambiguous language that
makes it difficult to subject them to rigorous testing.
How does peer review and consesus differ in science vs. pseudo-science? --->
Science places great importance on peer review, where scientific research is
scrutinized by experts in the field before it is published. This process helps ensure
the quality and reliability of scientific findings.
Pseudo-science typically lacks this rigorous peer review process and tends to rely on
self-publication or dissemination through non-scientific channels. As a result,
pseudo-scientific claims often lack widespread acceptance within the scientific
community.
, How does peer evidence-based reasoning differ in science vs. pseudo-science?
---> Science is rooted in empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and critical thinking.
Scientific theories and explanations are built on the accumulation of reliable and
reproducible data obtained through systematic experimentation and observation.
Pseudo-science, on the other hand, may selectively present or misinterpret evidence
to support preconceived beliefs or ideas. It often lacks the robust evidence base that
characterizes scientific disciplines.
How does predictive power differ in science vs. pseudo-science? ---> Science
aims to develop theories and models that can make accurate predictions about
natural phenomena. Through rigorous testing and refinement, scientific theories
become increasingly reliable in their predictive capabilities.
Pseudo-science often fails to make precise or testable predictions, relying instead on
vague or ambiguous claims that can be interpreted in various ways.
The demarcation problem seeks to answer which question? ---> What sets
scientific knowledge apart from other forms of knowledge?
What does the demarcation problem mean? ---> The demarcation problem refers
to the philosophical challenge of establishing a clear and objective criterion for
distinguishing between science and non-science, particularly pseudoscience or
non-scientific beliefs.
True or false: Manipulation of scientific data would be regarded as pseudoscience.
---> False.
While manipulation of scientific data is a serious ethical breach and can undermine
the credibility of scientific research, it does not automatically classify as
pseudoscience. Pseudoscience refers to a broader category of claims or practices
that are characterized by their deviation from the accepted scientific standards and
methodologies.
True or false: According to falsificationism, the accumulation of supporting evidence
can definitively confirm a theory's truth or correctness. ---> False.
Instead, scientific progress comes from actively seeking evidence that could
potentially disprove or falsify a theory. The more a theory withstands attempts at
falsification and the more it makes successful predictions, the more it gains empirical
support.
Ethics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (AB_1217)
Study these well, and you will be guaranteed to pass your exam!
To make an argument is to give a set of: ---> reasons (premises).
The function of premises is to: ---> support the conclusion.
What is pseudoscience? ---> A claim, belief or practice which is presented as
scientific (i.e. it POSES as it would be science), but which does not follow the
scientific method.
What is the main condition of something being pseudoscience? ---> Non-science
posing as science.
How does methodology differ in science vs. pseudo-science? ---> Science follows
the scientific method, a systematic and evidence-based approach to understanding
the natural world. It involves making observations, formulating hypotheses,
conducting experiments, and analyzing data to arrive at conclusions.
Pseudo-science, on the other hand, lacks a rigorous and empirical methodology. It
often relies on anecdotal evidence, personal testimonies, or unverified claims.
How does falsifiability differ in science vs. pseudo-science? ---> Scientific theories
and hypotheses are formulated in a way that allows them to be tested and potentially
falsified. This means that scientists actively seek evidence that could disprove their
theories.
In contrast, pseudo-scientific claims tend to be unfalsifiable or resistant to being
disproven. Pseudo-scientific ideas often rely on vague or ambiguous language that
makes it difficult to subject them to rigorous testing.
How does peer review and consesus differ in science vs. pseudo-science? --->
Science places great importance on peer review, where scientific research is
scrutinized by experts in the field before it is published. This process helps ensure
the quality and reliability of scientific findings.
Pseudo-science typically lacks this rigorous peer review process and tends to rely on
self-publication or dissemination through non-scientific channels. As a result,
pseudo-scientific claims often lack widespread acceptance within the scientific
community.
, How does peer evidence-based reasoning differ in science vs. pseudo-science?
---> Science is rooted in empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and critical thinking.
Scientific theories and explanations are built on the accumulation of reliable and
reproducible data obtained through systematic experimentation and observation.
Pseudo-science, on the other hand, may selectively present or misinterpret evidence
to support preconceived beliefs or ideas. It often lacks the robust evidence base that
characterizes scientific disciplines.
How does predictive power differ in science vs. pseudo-science? ---> Science
aims to develop theories and models that can make accurate predictions about
natural phenomena. Through rigorous testing and refinement, scientific theories
become increasingly reliable in their predictive capabilities.
Pseudo-science often fails to make precise or testable predictions, relying instead on
vague or ambiguous claims that can be interpreted in various ways.
The demarcation problem seeks to answer which question? ---> What sets
scientific knowledge apart from other forms of knowledge?
What does the demarcation problem mean? ---> The demarcation problem refers
to the philosophical challenge of establishing a clear and objective criterion for
distinguishing between science and non-science, particularly pseudoscience or
non-scientific beliefs.
True or false: Manipulation of scientific data would be regarded as pseudoscience.
---> False.
While manipulation of scientific data is a serious ethical breach and can undermine
the credibility of scientific research, it does not automatically classify as
pseudoscience. Pseudoscience refers to a broader category of claims or practices
that are characterized by their deviation from the accepted scientific standards and
methodologies.
True or false: According to falsificationism, the accumulation of supporting evidence
can definitively confirm a theory's truth or correctness. ---> False.
Instead, scientific progress comes from actively seeking evidence that could
potentially disprove or falsify a theory. The more a theory withstands attempts at
falsification and the more it makes successful predictions, the more it gains empirical
support.
