[WikiEN-l] SPOV threatens NPOV

[David Gerard]

stevertigo wrote:
> -- David Gerard <fun at 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.