A brief definition of scientific quackery
Arkady Golod, anesthesiologist
"Science and Life" No. 3-2009
Bookstalls, periodicals pages, TV programs, Internet sites and forums are full of anti-scientific nonsense. Sincerely sympathizing with the victims of pseudoscience and quackery, let's try to make a short definition of "brechology", like the definitions of dangerous animals and poisonous mushrooms.
Signs of the first order
If there are words in the publication: aura, biofield, chakra, bioenergetics, panacea, energy-informational, resonance–wave, psychic energy, thought form, telegony, wave genetics, wave genome, supersensible, astral, then you can be sure that you are dealing with quack writing.
The list can be continued, but it doesn't make much sense. The terminology of the charlatan brotherhood is constantly expanding, so orientation by "signal words" is not always sufficient for the correct evaluation of the text.
Signs of the second order
This is data about the identity of the author. As a rule, the main specialty of the authors of pseudoscientific works is far from the fields of knowledge to which their opuses are devoted. I deliberately use the term "opus" (from the Latin opus – case) in order not to specify whether it is a book, an article or a TV show.
The author's scientific regalia are of great interest for analysis. The more of them and the more carefully they are listed, the more careful it is necessary to treat the text. Among real scientists, vanity is considered bad form.
The modest "Candidate of Medical Sciences Abevegedeev" arouses much more confidence than "doctor of problems of the universe, academician of the XYZ Academy, honorary member of this and that Fantasm Akhineevich Chepukhanov-Grandiose".
"Honorary membership" in various academies is particularly alarming due to the significant differences between a member and an honorary member.
There is no doubt that many truly outstanding people have been awarded many awards. But, alas, their works are understandable only to the same professionals, and they almost do not condescend to popular publications.
In the works of professionals, there is not only self-praise, but also a general mention of the value of this work.
Expressions like: "Our research completely changes the idea of this and that"; "It has a special value"; "Everything that came before us is of no value" - coupled with promises of radical transformations in science, an immediate huge effect at negligible cost, with the humiliation of predecessors and competitors – they are reliable symptoms of quackery.
The author's definition of his work as revolutionary is a very serious reason to doubt both the competence of the author and the value of his creation.
Signs of the third order
These signs are found, in fact, in the content of creation. Some points that relate to this section have already been mentioned above. The authors of fantasy and quack writings are not at all interested in the rapid identification of their anti-science. Some have achieved outstanding success in mimicry and surprisingly cleverly disguise the pseudoscientific nature of their creations among quite reasonable reasoning. Limiting myself to medicine and biology, let me remind you that in biological systems and in living organisms, all known physical laws operate as strictly as in inanimate ones. Specific biological laws have no less force and are also not violated. Therefore, if the author is seriously talking about paranormal abilities – seeing through a wall, reading letters in closed envelopes, levitation, telekinesis, reviving the dead, operations without a knife (with the extraction of giblets, but without a wound and scar) – you are reading a fairy tale. The use of scientific terminology is designed not so much for the reader's consciousness as for the hypnotizing effect of incomprehensible words that serve as a conductor of author's ideas into the brain of readers/ listeners. The reader is simply not given time to comprehend the verbal flow. He only manages to grasp individual pieces written in normal language. They also contain thoughts that, according to the author's plan, the consumer of the product of his thoughts should assimilate. In theory, it would be necessary to read thoughtfully, slowly... But where there, we are accustomed (and forced to be accustomed) to speed reading. So we swallow without chewing. This way of absorbing spiritual food is more dangerous for the brain than for the stomach hasty absorption of bodily food.
So, the increased concentration of foreign–language terms where it is quite possible to do with the words of the native language, the abundance of complex grammatical constructions is a signal to the reader: "Look, don't get into trouble!" For quack opuses, the absence of doubts and intolerance to objections are characteristic. An undoubted sign of quackery is the lack of reaction to criticism on the merits and the transition to the personality of the opponent.
Pseudoscientific "fabrications" are characterized by universality and universality. A charlatan does not stoop to solving narrow tasks. If he has made a revolution in science, then it is global. If he treats oncological diseases with an aspen stick (by God, there is such a patent!) – that's all without exception. If he invented a miracle diet, then it suits everyone, heals completely and without the right to appeal. If it describes a miracle drug, then it has no contraindications and you can give it to anyone.
When an author lacks factual or logical (often both) arguments, he resorts to referring to authorities. At the same time, statements and views that were absolutely alien to them during their lifetime are often attributed to the deceased authorities. It's a well-known fact: the dead do not have shame. In such cases, familiarity with the biography of the great ones allows you to reliably identify forgery and treat the author's creation accordingly.
If the "revolutionary doctrine" offered to the consumer does not have a scientific background, this is a very, very reliable sign of brechology. Science develops progressively, the basis for new knowledge is always the old, proven. If the author has no predecessors, and his "science" has jumped out into the light of God, like the devil out of a snuffbox, it will be completely natural to treat it as an evil force. Similarly, I propose to treat all kinds of "insights", "insights" and other gifts of God. All esotericism, hysteria and mysticism by their very presence in the "scientific" opus uniquely determine its belonging to brechology.
Another sign of the third order I would call "unshaven according to Occam." Occam's razor was called the principle formulated in the XIV century by the Franciscan monk William Occam, which states: Entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate – "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." In other words, you should not come up with a complex explanation where a simple one is enough. Einstein slightly changed the wording: "Everything should be simplified as long as possible, but no more." This principle is not observed in pseudoscientific opuses. An example of a violation of the Occam principle can be the reasoning about the Bermuda Triangle. In an area with extremely intensive navigation, with very unstable air currents and sea currents, ships and planes disappear from time to time. Brechologists explain these catastrophes by the action of otherworldly forces. Accidents due to natural causes (termination of communication with the aircraft due to electrical problems; falling into the sea due to navigation errors and fuel overspending; the death of the ship under the impact of an abnormally high single wave) are rejected in favor of beautiful and unfounded fabrications.
I conclude the article with a simple recommendation: to distinguish between science and brechology, use common sense.
If the lotteries haven't gone bankrupt yet, the prophets are worthless. If there are still patients, all miracle drugs are garbage. If someone offers a miracle, he is a charlatan.
Portal "Eternal youth" www.vechnayamolodost.ru
23.03.2009