Why Do People Believe in Pseudoscience?

Gizmodo ^ | 03/11/19 | Daniel Kolitz

[ifinnegan]

I agree.

And we get Scientism, as opposed to science.

[Windflier]

Speaking of theories that are non-falsifiable, the theory of evolution is exhibit A for that. It has lots of ad hoc modifications needed to explain all sorts of unexpected things. A defining characteristic of pseudo science is ad hoc modifications.

You've just described modern cosmology to a t.

[circlecity]

“On what basis does any sentient being accept a given proposition as true?”

Welcome to that branch of philosophy known as epistemology. Ultimately everyone’s worldview rests on a set of presuppositions which cannot be quantified.

[sparklite2]

But Zeus knows we can never run out of woo.
There’s always someone peddling it and some
one else too terrified to call it what is is.

[Windflier]

Truth is FOUND by the priests and mystics and the philosophers...

And even Joe Lunchbucket.

[sparklite2]

I would say if it leads to accurate predictions which can be reproduced by others, it’s safe to call it true.

[grey_whiskers]

Dorothy L. Sayers did.

And she made a compelling case, from the standpoint of considering God as an author or playwright, not an engineer.

Given that Sayers was one of the first female graduates of Oxford University, and a successful novelist in her own right (as well as apparently being the one to coin the phrase "It pays to advertise") she approached the issue from her own specialty.

[Chaguito]

An article with a transparently preconceived purpose and conclusion.

[amihow]

I agree. Some of the most profound wisdom I have heard has been from street people others avoid.

Or my yard guy.

[sparklite2]

I still remember the scientific claim there were CANALS on Mars

---

It was originally meant to be ‘channels,’ probably a distinction without a difference, Anyway, looking at the fuzzy image of Mars available to us at the time, ‘science’ made no claims about their beings canals or not. Speculate and claim are not synonymous.

[Inyo-Mono]

Finally, pseudosciences are popular so because they often provide people with beliefs that they would like to be true—anything from miracle cures to the existence of a benevolent God to life after death and much else besides.

Seeing is believing. I have seen it.

[reasonisfaith]

Your comment is one of the most annoyingly common claims on this subject.

Science does nothing but look for true facts.

[reasonisfaith]

“Science doesn’t look for the truth” is propaganda meant to keep “science” as a political tool for the world’s top liars.

[onyx]

Because they're LAZY!

[reasonisfaith]

In fact, that’s probably why these people make such claims. Because they prefer science be a discipline of lies.

Global warming, anyone?

Transgenderism?

[reasonisfaith]

When it’s not a lie.

[reasonisfaith]

What happens when science doesn’t look for truth:

BBC’s Climate Lies Becoming A Habit
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3735226/posts

[Captain Compassion]

Read your Popper. Here’s another one for you.

The best you can say of any scientific, law, theory or hypothesis is not that it is true but that it has yet to be proven false. — Captain Compassion

[The_Media_never_lie]

Partly because those who teach are trained in pseudo education departments.

[Getready]

Thank you for exposing the articles’ author for mischaracterizing most if not all creationists beliefs. The long age folks got their own starlight problem also. Called “ horizon” problem...needed a fix and hyperinflation of the big bang cosmos...(with no experimental verification) was postulated to solve it...there...now it is scientific...cuz i say it is so.