stevertigo wrote:
-- David Gerard <fun(a)thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
>So what term do you suggest for the thing that is
>currently usefully described by the word
>"pseudoscience"?
I dunno- "quasiscientific," maybe. Because
'pseudo'
carries a prejudicial connotation of 'falseness,'
while 'quasi' carries a perhaps more accurate
connotation of "almost" or "partly" being something;
in this case, as something being based in science.
Original research. Is there a current word that means the same thing?
The term "pseudoscientific," to be fair,
seems like a
natural one to use in cases where non-scientific
claims are asserted as if there was established
scientific proof. Its probably more accurate to just
call certain specific outlandish claims as plain
scientific 'fraud,' though my guess would be that that
would probably be considered POV. 'Pseudoscience' is
not much different than calling something 'fraud,'
though 'fraud' seems to imply deliberate deception
rather than an honest claim, written in religionese,
and borne of intellectual confusion (SPOV) or
'ecstatic inspiration' (RPOV).
It sounds like you don't like that some of the things so described are
associated with others of the things so described.
- d.