Science by its very nature is comprised of provable theories, methods or data. Knowledge that is scientific is proven by rigorous valid and reliable data, theories or methods. Science is a process of discovery and justification. Karl Popper argued that because of its nature of discovery and justification, science is totally objective “Science puts forward hypotheses in a conjectural spirit, and then strives to refute them. As long as such hypotheses are falsifiable, in the sense that there are possible variations which would disprove them, then the objectivity of science if assured” (Honderich, 1995, 809). Pseudo-sciences are those systems that use theories, methods or data and purport to be scientific but are not. The pseudo-sciences differ from the sciences because they are not capable of being proven. For example, even though many of these portended sciences remain unproven, many people still believe in them. ESP (extrasensory perception), astrology and graphology are examples of pseudo-sciences and even first ladies of the United States have heavily relied on astrological information.
However, scientists and others debate the validity of the pseudo-sciences. They feel that because fundamental laws cannot be discovered or proven in these systems then their existence remains unproven by the very definition of scientific knowledge. However, those who support and practice the pseudo-sciences argue that the high number of unexplained phenomena on record is proof of the validity of their beliefs. Of course, many pseudo-sciences are further eroded in terms of respect in the scientific community because the very unknown nature of their fundamental laws allows for many dubious practitioners to use them as a means of bilking unsuspecting individuals out of money. The profusion of 900-number psychic hotlines in the past decade is evidence of this. People are actually willing to pay out large
...