Differences Between Good Science and Pseudoscience
This paper discusses the differences between good science and pseudoscience. In addition, it will also explain two examples of pseudoscience and explain greenwashing. For a long time, there has been great confusion about the relationship that exists between science and pseudoscience. In many cases, belief systems that lack scientific basis masquerade or tend to appear in a scientific manner in order to earn the special respect that science has. Science entails acquisition of information in a systematic manner (Smith, 2009). Its basis revolves around the fact that certain principles guide the operation of the world, and people can only invent such principles by embracing observation and experimentation. The procedural method that science considers makes it earn special interest even though it is not the only way of learning about the world.
Pseudoscience, on the other hand, is an area that is not scientific even though it portrays scientific impressions. This makes pseudoscience to have a wide definition. For instance, both fraud and mistakes that occur in science do follow a systematic process and they remain scientific. They become instances of bad science, but do not give the impression of pseudoscience. However, because pseudoscience mostly contradicts science, such instances of bad science qualify as a pseudoscience for contradicting legitimate scientific research.
It is, therefore, worth noting that there are various differences that exist between good science and pseudoscience basing on the characteristics of their findings. For instance, researchers express their scientific findings through scientific journals. Such scientific journals are peer-reviewed and they ensure maintenance of rigorous standards of accuracy and honesty. In science, researchers search and study any identified failures. This is because, in some cases, incorrect scientific theories can accidentally make accurate predictions, but none of the correct theories can lead to incorrect predictions (Coker, 2001). In science, time is an essential element for learning the physical processes under investigation. It is worth noting that science demands results that can be reproduced. This means that science demands precise description of experiments in order to facilitate duplication or improvements. Science does not market or advocate for products or practices that are unproven. Finally, good science differs from pseudoscience because of the way it convinces through evidence and arguments that a have a mathematical and logical basis.
On the other hand, pseudoscience differs from good science in a number of ways. For instance, the general public is the main target of the pseudoscientific literature. This means that pseudoscientific literature lacks pre-publication verification, standards, reviews, and demand for precision as well as accuracy (Coker, 2001). Any identified failures are never studied; instead, they are rationalized, explained away, discounted, excused, ignored and avoided. It should also be clear there is verification or reproduction of pseudoscientific results. Time is not an essential element as there is no finding or studying any physical processes or phenomena. Most pseudoscience products are questionable and they include dietary supplements, courses, and books.
Finally, pseudoscience differs from good science because of the way it convinces through belief and faith. Because of its strong quasi-religious aspect, it attempts to convert instead of convincing. Creation science; for instance, is an example of pseudoscience. It entails the belief that all things existing in the universe result from creation by the creator (Smith, 2009). The evidence of arguments in creation science is mostly biblical in nature. Such evidence is not primarily expressed in peer-reviewed scientific journal in order to qualify as good science. Another example of pseudoscience is full moon lunacy, which entails the belief about the correlation of manifestation of lunacy with full moon. In this case, there is no evidence mathematical or logical reasoning to explain this correlation. Finally, greenwashing refers to a government, company, or politician a lot of money and time claiming to be eco-friendly or green through marketing and advertisements instead of actually implementing policies and practices that can minimize and prevent environmental destruction (Bowen, 2014).
In conclusion, the dissimilarity between good science and pseudoscience exceed experimentation of the claims that arise. It entails performing scientific research. This is because new problems arise with the new discoveries that continue to come into scientific considerationOrder Unique Answer Now