sign in sign up
<<
Home , Flat Earth, Fringe science, Immanuel Velikovsky, Scientific consensus

& Society

The problem with

Pseudoscience is not the antithesis of professional science but thrives in science’s shadow

Michael D Gordin

t is quite difficult to picture a pseudosci- European languages, a great number of Before science became a profession—with entist—really picture him or her over the disparate doctrines have been categorized as formalized training, credentialing, publishing I course of a day, a year, or a whole career. sharing a core quality—pseudoscientificity, venues, careers—the category of pseudo- What kind or does he or she actu- if you will—when in they do not. It is science did not exist. As soon as profes- ally do, what differentiates him or her from based on this diversity that I refer to such sionalization blossomed, tagging competing a carpenter, or a historian, or a working beliefs and theories as “fringe” rather than theories as pseudoscientific became an ? In short, what do such people as “pseudo”: Their defining characteristic is important tool for to define what think they are up to? the distance from the center of the main- they understood science to be. In fact, despite ...... stream scientific consensus in whichever many decades of strenuous effort by philoso- direction, not some essential property they phers and historians, a precise definition of “...it is a significant point for share. “science” remains elusive. It should be noted reflection that all individuals Scholars have by and large tended to however that the absence of such definitional who have been called ignore as regrettable side- clarity has not seriously inhibited the ability shows to the main narrative of the of of scientists to deepen our understanding of “pseudoscientists” have science, but there is a good deal to be nature tremendously. considered themselves to be learned by applying the same tools of analy- “scientists”, with no prefix.” sis that have been used to understand main- What is science? ...... stream science. This is not, I stress, to imply that there is no difference between hollow- Of course, many people believe that an accu- The answer might surprise you. When theories and geophysics; on the rate test of whether something is properly they find time after the obligation of contrary, the differences are the point of the scientific exists: philosopher ’s supporting themselves, they read papers in analysis. Focusing on the historical and doctrine of “”, whereby “the specific areas, propose theories, gather data, conceptual relationship between the fringe criterion of the scientific status of a theory is write articles, and, maybe, publish them. and the core of the various as that its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability” What they imagine they are doing is, in a blurry border has fluctuated over the centu- [1]. Popper unveiled this theory in a lecture word, “science”. They might be wrong about ries provides powerful analytical leverage in 1953, and since the 1980s—when it was that—many of us hold incorrect judgments for understanding where contemporary anti- cited as a demarcation criterion between about the true nature of our activities—but science movements come from and how and biology in the US Supreme surely it is a significant point for reflection scientists might address them. Court decision McLean v. Arkansas Board of that all individuals who have been called ...... Education—it has become enormously popu- “pseudoscientists” have considered them- lar as a talking-point and in school curricula. selves to be “scientists”, with no prefix. “As soon as professionalization Nonetheless, it fails both logically and empir- blossomed, tagging competing ically as an accurate standard for demarcat- What is pseudoscience? theories as pseudoscientific ing scientific claims from disreputable imposters [2]. First, we have no guidance “Pseudoscience” is a bad category for analy- became an important tool for about when this goal has been accurately sis. It exists entirely as a negative attribution scientists to define what they achieved: Did our falsify the rele- that scientists and non-scientists hurl at understood science to be” vant claim, or did we just perform the experi- others but never apply to themselves. Not ...... ment poorly? More importantly, Popper’s only do they apply the term exclusively as a criterion does not segment doctrines the way discrediting slur, they do so inconsistently. The central claim of this essay is that the we would expect. Many fringe doctrines Over the past two-and-a-quarter centuries concept of “pseudoscience” was called into (psychical research, theories, AIDS- since the term popped into the Western being as the shadow of professional science. HIV denial) make pinpoint falsifiable

Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA. E-mail: [email protected] DOI 10.15252/embr.201744870 | Published online 9 August 2017

1482 EMBO reports Vol 18 |No9 | 2017 ª 2017 The Author Michael D Gordin The problem with pseudoscience EMBO reports

predictions exactly as Popper demands, and many researchers we would now classify as As one sees from each case, the boundary many mainstream sciences that analyze geneticists, or the ether theories which dom- between the mainstream and the fringe is unrepeatable past events (, evolu- inated 19th-century physics and are still well relatively porous and there is a lot move- tionary biology, ) do not. The diffi- represented in fringe publications. ment across it—although, to be sure, once a culty comes with relying on a single bright Another group, for lack of a better term, doctrine is thrust into the fringe, it is quite line that focuses on semantic form alone. As are the ideological fringe sciences. Most difficult for it to get out again. Some ideas, philosophers have since pointed out, no prominently associated with Hitler’s National such as or inheritance of single dimension of analysis suffices [3]. Socialism or Stalin’s , these acquired characteristics, do on occasion ...... doctrines, such as the anti-relativity, anti- reappear in highly attenuated form, but this quantum, and anti-Semitic Deutsche Physik is rare. Typically, the long list of vestigial “...opposition to climate or anti-Mendelian Michurinism trumpeted by doctrines grows apace. The point is not only science or tobacco regulation in Trofim Lysenko from the 1930s to the 1960s, to demonstrate that the heterogeneity of the some cases deploys the explicit are commonly considered distortions of fringe defies simple classification and rational thinking in the service of a political dismissal, but also to suggest that focusing articulation of free-market ideology. Other fringe doctrines, less obvi- on the content of the theories is not the most fundamentalism as an ously fraught, carry strong markers of politi- productive way to understand the durability ideological position” cal, religious, or racist identification and are of fringe science. The more appropriate ...... intended by their advocates to harmonize vantage point is professionalization itself. natural science with ideology. By way of Approaching fringe doctrines from the example, opposition to climate science or Worlds in collision point of view of their advocates—that is, as tobacco regulation in some cases deploys the efforts to engage in science as they under- explicit articulation of free-market fundamen- Various fringe doctrines share family resem- stand it—reveals how much these varied talism as an ideological position. blances, but each family member is often movements concentrate on hostility to or A third of these overlapping groups is the more distinct from counterparts in different imitation of those very features that make mentalist fringe. Especially abundant, these families than from aspects of the specific science “professional”. This strongly doctrines focus on allegedly unrecognized or mainstream scientific theories it critiques. suggests that scientists might confront the underappreciated powers of mind, and Fringe ideas share in common that they are fringe more effectively if they built from the include a complex family tree that descends all, to greater or lesser degree, ostracized profession outward, rather than attempting from late 18th-century Mesmerism to late from the genteel company of professional to lop off one Hydra’s head after another 19th-century Spiritualism (table-rapping, science. A complicated but persistent from behind defensive walls. se´ances, and so on), to the research in extra- engagement with science as a profession sensory perception (ESP) that has sporadi- characterizes the most persistent and promi- Classification of fringe sciences cally appeared in psychology journals since nent fringe doctrines of the past half-century. the 1930s. The complexity of the brain and ...... Any attempt to build a taxonomy of the the relative youth of neuroscience have many doctrines that have been labeled as provided ample space for unorthodox think- “Sometimes attempts to “pseudoscientific” reveals the impossibility ing and —ranging from psycho- mobilize against perceived of an internally consistent single definition analysis to psychopharmaceuticals—which can backfire” of fringe science. The following breakdown necessarily brings along vestigial and ideo- ...... is therefore not meant to be comprehensive, logical fringes in their wake. and different people surely would group I conclude this partial taxonomy with Largely forgotten today, the furor that these or other ideas in various ways—the those cases I call the controversy fringe. swirled around the cosmic catastrophist point is that it is impossible to come up with Perhaps more than any others, they illus- arguments of Immanuel Velikovsky (1895– a single categorization that would include all trate how problematic determining any 1979) from 1950 until shortly after his death of them. “essence” for the fringe is. The controversy provides an excellent case study [5]. Born in We can begin with vestigial doctrines. fringe comprises cases in which potentially (then in the , now in These are systems of thought that used to be path-breaking work is published within the ), Velikovsky moved peripatetically considered sciences but that professional bounds of a science and is greeted with to , , Tel Aviv, and scientists have, over time, either gradually intense skepticism and debate, typically before sailing to City in 1939, just moved away from or actively excluded. The aired across the pages of professional jour- before the guns began firing in the Second most well-known are and , nals. There are two ways this might play World War. He originally intended to write a which during the Renaissance were largely out: The controversy ends up vindicating book to refute ’s final work, synonymous with what would become by the radical proposal and the science itself is Moses and Monotheism, but ended up the end of the Enlightenment “” restructured (as happened with relativity constructing a narrative that argued that the and “chemistry” (on alchemy, see [4]). The theory and quantum mechanics) or the resemblances among ancient mythic tradi- same can be said for , a term which claim is rejected and those who persist in tions (Hebrew, Greek, Egyptian, Mesopota- preceded “genetics” and even “gene” and defending it are relegated to the fringe (cold mian, Indic, Chinese) could be explained by existed for decades as a superset, including fusion, polywater, phlogiston). an astronomical-geological cataclysm that

ª 2017 The Author EMBO reports Vol 18 |No9 | 2017 1483 EMBO reports The problem with pseudoscience Michael D Gordin

was witnessed by the entire globe and then given that he had attempted to reconcile the psychology, neuroscience, cosmology—has transmuted into metaphorical legends. The Hebrew with the structure of the solar had to pursue. hypothesized catastrophe violated most of system. But the boycott and the immediate Both lessons from the Velikovsky episode the established tenets of astronomy, geology, backlash from scientists, a consequence of emphasize the significance of the structures and : the electromagnetic and their own perceived insecurity amid the of professional science in thinking about the gravitational capture of a by the Earth massive interlinking of professional science contemporary fringe. Certain doctrines, such in near orbit, tilting the Earth’s axis, raining and the national-security state at that very as creationism and , benefit fire from the , spawning earth- moment, oriented the narrative in a very from the enormous financial and organiza- quakes, until decades later the comet settled specific direction. As the name of the contro- tional resources of American evangelical as the planet ; that is, our nearest plan- versy indicates, Velikovsky’s story came to Christianity in order to build a parallel estab- etary neighbor was born in the full witness- be understood by his defenders and by lishment with graduate programs and ing of the world’s cultures about 1500 himself as a 20th-century reprise of the so- research institutes [6]. Others, like , BCE. Velikovsky’s monograph detailing this called Galileo Affair: an outsider facing define themselves in opposition to the profes- theory (Fig 1), Worlds in Collision (1950), persecution for speaking up for truth against sionals, arguing that the very hallmarks of became an immediate non-fiction bestseller the forces of a reactionary establishment. professional astronomers’ respectability are for Macmillan Press, which happened to be The appeal this gave Velikovsky was unde- indications of their corruption by a military the leading scientific publisher in the USA. niable, and in the 1960s and 1970s his cover-up. Recently, historians have followed Scientists, especially astronomers, responded popularity among the student counterculture the ways in which what had originally been immediately with hostile reviews, and a skyrocketed. He remained a headlining gad- an advertising campaign developed for the small subset proposed boycotting Macmillan fly to public scientists like and tobacco industry—the marketing of denial Press, which would have crippled the pro- Harold Urey until he passed away in his and doubt—spread through a parallel profes- fitability of the firm. A few weeks into its home in Princeton, NJ, in November 1979. sional network of think tanks and gray litera- spectacular launch, responsibility for Worlds There are two points to highlight in this ture into a series of anti-regulatory doctrines in Collision was transferred to Doubleday, a brief account. The first is that Worlds in dedicated to obscuring the mainstream competing publisher without a significant Collision seemed poised to be the season’s professional consensus on acid rain, chlo- science textbook division. publishing success and then fade away like rofluorocarbons, ozone, and of course The “Velikovsky affair”, as it came to many other such books, when the actions of anthropogenic [7,8]. be known, could have been about many professional scientists unintentionally things—not least about the conflict or endowed Velikovsky and his followers with The shadow of science harmony between science and religion, a remarkably potent foundational story. Sometimes attempts to mobilize against To return to the metaphor I advanced at the perceived pseudosciences can backfire. beginning of this essay, pseudoscience is The second point might at first seem unre- science’s shadow. Specifically, it is the lated: In the second wave of countercultural shadow of professional science, and just as enthusiasm for cosmic , Veli- a shadow cannot exist without the object kovskians began establishing courses on casting it, so does every object necessarily college campuses and then journals of their cast shadows. During the past two hundred own, the latter complete with years, demarcating what stands as legiti- using referees selected from among their own mate, mainstream science from its less repu- ranks, footnotes, and complicated orbital table counterparts on the fringe has been a calculations. In reaction to a scientific main- central mechanism of how various disci- stream that they understood as suppressing plines have developed. their own heterodox point of view, Velikovs- Every time you have a core, you neces- kians assembled many features that resem- sarily have a fringe—it might be a source of bled those of professional science—a ideas the core considers misguided or even counter-establishment, we might say. This dangerous, but it is also a place from which significant feature can be found among many exciting new perspectives might emerge. of the more dominant fringe doctrines in the Although contemporary fringe groups in sciences: Their advocates see themselves as physics are frequently hostile to Albert fundamentally pursuing science, so they do Einstein’s relativity theory, they also love all the things that scientists do, and that the idea of an innovator coming from a means publishing, teaching, and finding patent office outside the academy [9]. Carl other doctrines on the fringe that they can Sagan, one of the leading figures in public denounce as pseudoscientific—the Velikovs- attempts to both address and extirpate the kians typically singled out creationism. This fringe in the 1970s (ESP, UFOs, Velikovsky), Figure 1. Cover of the 1977 Edition of is intrinsically a mimetic process, and it put his hopes in improved . “ ” Worlds on Collision by Immanuel is precisely the same path that any new Raising the level of Velikovsky published by Pocket Books. discipline in the sciences—evolutionary around the globe is a laudable goal that I

1484 EMBO reports Vol 18 |No9 | 2017 ª 2017 The Author Michael D Gordin The problem with pseudoscience EMBO reports

wholeheartedly support, but we should not that the fringe emphasizes, but a few intimate connection between the sciences imagine that this will remove the fringe. It complaints have remained rather persistent: and those doctrines variously labeled pseu- will change the content of what people abstruse jargon, excessive mathematization, dosciences, it also refocuses our attention on object to—less , although perhaps and an impression that science is cliquish and the causes of the phenomenon. When some- more alternative theories of heredity—but resists engagement with outsiders. These one makes shadow puppets on the wall, our the desire to participate in science from points all stress the high barriers to entry in eyes are naturally drawn to the striking, outside the professional ranks will persist. contemporary science, marks of the extensive cleanly outlined shapes of rabbits and ...... training that has characterized professional- ducks, but that is not where the action is. ization of inquiry into the natural world. This Similarly, I suggest the pseudosciences are “The more attractive science suggests that reflexive doubling down on not real in themselves; they are defined by is, the more people with professional qualifications (“Trust me external projection. The important thing to unorthodox ideas want to because I am a credentialed scientist”) is watch is not the shadow, but the hand. It simply pouring oil on the flames. On the other not only is the source of the shadows; it is model themselves upon it, and hand, explanation of why those professional also the more fascinating and complex the greater the public appetite barriers are built the way they are (“Climate phenomenon of the two. The fringe not only for doctrines with the is a very complicated phenomenon, and shadows the core, it is continuous with it, appearance of science” mathematical approximations give us a hope and the most effective way to deal with ...... of understanding it, and that takes training”) attacks from the latter is to ensure that the might go some way to meeting the critics. former is in good working order. This is easier to see by extending the Communities of professional scientists also shadow metaphor a little: The brighter the need to publicly discuss and address—with Conflict of interest light, the sharper the shadow. There have full honesty—crises of confidence within the The author declares that he has no conflict of been periodic upticks in the visibility of vari- their subfields, such as contemporary replica- interest. ous fringe doctrines, and right now we live tion debacles or revelations of fraud, lest fail- in one of those moments (AIDS-HIV skepti- ure to do so foster even more suspicion of References cism, anti-GMO movements, and so on); the professionals. Many of the recent changes in 1. Popper K (2002) Science: conjectures and refuta- 1970s (ESP, von Da¨niken), the early 1950s publishing practices in the sciences, such as tions. In Conjectures and refutations: the growth (UFOs, ), the 1870s (spiritual- obligatory conflict-of-interest statements or of scientific knowledge,pp43 – 78. New York: ism), and the 1820s () were other making data open access, are examples of Routledge such prominent hotspots. These are, para- practices that address critiques leveled by 2. Laudan L (1983) The demise of the demarca- doxically, not moments when the prestige of certain advocates of fringe doctrines—aposi- tion problem. In Physics, , and science was low, but when it was high. The tive unintended consequence of remedies , Cohen RS, Laudan L (eds), pp more attractive science is, the more people implemented for other reasons. 111 – 127. Dodrecht: Reidel with unorthodox ideas want to model them- One could also wish for professional 3. Pigliucci M, Boudry M (eds) (2013) Philosophy selves upon it, and the greater the public scientists to speak more directly to the public of pseudoscience: reconsidering the demarca- appetite for doctrines with the appearance of not about the content of their work, but the tion problem. Chicago: University of Chicago science. In an age of anti-vaccination mobi- form: How are laboratories organized, why Press lization and organized hostility to GMOs, is the division of labor so specialized, why is 4. Principe LM (2013) Secrets of alchemy. this point might seem absurd. But pay atten- mathematization so important and how does Chicago: University of Chicago Press tion to how the claims are made. Studies in one acquire the skills, what is the process of 5. Gordin MD (2012) The pseudoscience wars: prestigious journals are cited—even if those training from undergraduate to postdoc actu- Immanuel Velikovsky and the birth of the articles have since been retracted—chemical ally like? Demystifying those aspects of modern fringe. Chicago: University of Chicago ingredients invoked, parallel experts are science that are stamps of its being profes- Press brought out. This is how debate happens in sional, rather than reiterating oversimplified 6. Numbers RL (2006) The creationists: from public science, and people whom the main- versions of revisable knowledge claims, scientific creationism to intelligent design, exp stream considers far out on the fringe see would at the very least educate neutral edn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press themselves as engaged in the same project parties more about the daily practices of 7. Oreskes N, Conway EM (2010) Merchants of in form, albeit different in content. This science, and provide a point of collaboration doubt: how a handful of scientists obscured observation is not to belittle advocates of between the sciences and those social scien- the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to fringe doctrines—as, for example, does tists—anthropologists, historians, and sociol- global warming. New York: Bloomsbury Richard Feynman [10]—but rather to illumi- ogists—who have made great strides in 8. Mooney C (2006) The republican war on nate how the mainstream position might elucidating precisely these features of scien- science, rev edn. New York: Basic Books more fruitfully address the fringe’s claims. tists’ work. What these practices will not do 9. Wertheim M (2011) Physics on the fringe: is eliminate the fringe entirely, because the smoke rings, circlons, and alternative theo- Addressing the fringe fringe is ineradicable. ries of everything. New York: Walker & Understanding the scientific fringe as a Company Since the cultural significance of science necessary shadow of the professional scien- 10. Feynman RP (1974) . Eng changes constantly, so do the salient points tific consensus not only emphasizes the Sci 37: 10 – 13

ª 2017 The Author EMBO reports Vol 18 |No9 | 2017 1485