Summary
In this paper I will argue that a profile of the pseudo-sciences can be gained from the scientific pretensions of the pseudo-scientist. These pretensions provide two yardsticks which together take care of the charge of scientific prejudice that any suggested demarcation of pseudo-science has to face. To demonstrate that my analysis has teeth I will apply it to Freud and modern-day Bach-kabbalists. Against Laudan I will argue that the problem of demarcation is not a pseudo-problem, though the discussion will bear out that Laudan's replacement question, namely the question whether someone's theory is well-confirmed, is not, as Lugg claimed, independent of the question as to whether that person is a pseudoscientist. I further argue that my prototype pseudo-scientists do not have the shortcomings highlighted in Thagard's recent analysis of pseudo-science.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cioffi, F.: 1985, ‘Psychoanalysis, Pseudo-science and Testability’, in Curry, G. and Musgrave A. (eds.): 1985,Popper and the Human Sciences, Nijhoff, Dordrecht.
Cohen, R. S. and L. Laudan (eds.): 1983,Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Derksen, A. A.: 1985, ‘Falsifiability as Fake-Cement: The Alleged Unity of Karl Popper's Philosophy of Science’,Philosophical Studies 48, 313–336.
Derksen, A. A.: 1992, ‘Does the Tally Argument Make Freud a Sophisticated Methodologist?, Grünbaumn's Friendly Attempt to Save Freud as a Methodologist’,Philosophy of Science 59, 75–101.
Edelson, M.: 1984,Hypothesis and Evidence in Psychoanalysis, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Freud, S.: 1896, ‘The Aetiology of Hysteria’,The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud 3.
Freud, S.: 1905, ‘A Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria’ (Dora),S.E. 7.
Freud, S.: 1906, ‘My Views on the Part Played by Sexuality in the Aetiology of the Neuroses’,S.E. 7.
Freud, S.: 1909a, ‘Analysis of a Phobia in a Five-year Old Boy’ (Little Hans),S.E. 10.
Freud, S.: 1909b, ‘Notes upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis’ (Ratman),S.E. 10.
Freud, S.: 1912, ‘Recommendations to Physicians Practicing Psycho-analysis’,S.E. 12.
Freud, S.: 1917,Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, S.E. 14.
Freud, S.: 1918, ‘From the History of an Infantile Neurosis’ (Wolfman)S.E. 14.
Freud, S.: 1923, ‘Remarks on the Theory and Practice of Dream Interpretation’,S.E. 19.
Freud, S.: 1925a, ‘The Resistances to Psycho-analysis’,S.E. 19.
Freud, S.: 1925b, ‘An Autobiographical Study’,S.E. 20.
Freud, S.: 1926, ‘The Question of Lay Analysis: Conversations with an Impartial Person’,S.E. 20.
Gay, P.: 1988,Freud: A Life for Our Time, J. M. Dent & Sons.
Glymour, C.: 1980,Theory and Evidence, Princeton U. P., Princeton, N. J.
Glymour, C.: 1983, ‘The Theory of Your Dreams’, in: Cohen and Laudan (ed.): 1983, pp. 57–71.
Goldman, Alvin I.: 1986,Epistemology and Cognition, Univ. of Harvard Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Grünbaum, A.: 1979, ‘Is Freudian Psychoanalytic Theory Pseudo-Scientific by Karl Popper's Criterion of Demarcation?’,American Philosophical Quarterly 16, 131–141.
Grünbaum, A.: 1984,The Foundation of Psycho-Analysis. A Philosophical Critique, Univ. of California Press, Berkeley Cal.
Jones, E.: 1953–57,The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud. Quoted from the abridged Penguin edition, 1964, p. 253.
Laudan, L.: 1983, ‘The Demise of the Demarcation Problem’, in: R. S. Cohen and L. Laudan (eds.): 1983, pp. 111–127.
Lugg, A.: 1987, ‘Bunkum, Flim-Flam and Quackery: Pseudoscience as a Philosophical Problem’,Dialectica 41, 221–230.
Marmor, J.: 1962, ‘Psychoanalytic Therapy as an Educational Process’, in: Masserman: 1962, Vol. V, pp. 286–299.
Masserman, J. (ed.): 1962,Modern Psychoanalytic Education, New York: Grune & Stratton, Vol. V.
Obholzer, K.: 1980,Gespräche mit dem Wolfmann. Eine Psychoanalyse und die Folgen, Rowolt Verlag, Reinbek bei Hamburg.
Popper, K. R.: 1963, ‘Science: Conjectures and Refutations’, in:Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Popper, K. R.: 1974, ‘Replies to My Critics’, in Schilpp, P. A.The Philosophy of Karl Popper, Open Court, LaSalle, Ill.
Popper, K. R.: 1986, ‘Predicting Overt Behavior versus Predicting Hidden States’,The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9 254–255.
Sulloway, F. J.: 1979,Freud, Biologist of the Mind, New York: Basic Books.
Thagard, P.: 1980, ‘Resemblance, Correlation and Pseudo-Science’, in M. Hanenet al., Science, Pseudo-science and Society, W. Laurier University Press, Waterloo, Ont., 1980, pp. 17–28.
Thagard, P.: 1988,Computational Philosophy of Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., Especially chpt. 9: ‘Pseudo-science’.
van Houten, K. and M. Kasbergen: 1985,Bach and his Numbers in Dutch, de Walburg Pers, Zutphen.
von Eckardt, B.: 1982, ‘The Scientific Status of Psychoanalysis’, in Gilman (ed.),Introducing Psychoanalytic Theory, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Derksen, A.A. The seven sins of pseudo-science. J Gen Philos Sci 24, 17–42 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00769513
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00769513
