[WikiEN-l] Pseudoscience category - GSPOV

Tue Jun 28 20:30:17 UTC 2005

David Gerard wrote:

>There is such a thing as pseudoscience and things that are deserve the
>label. It belongs under 'science' because it claims the clothes of science
>but isn't, hence the 'pseudo' - religion doesn't do that (except of course
>when it does). The objectors are basically stating "I don't like it being
>applied to my favourite thing so it must be a violation of NPOV." I see no
>reason to indulge this.
>  
>
I still don't really like that idea, because it's strongly taking one 
side in a dispute.  Should we, for example, have a 
[[Category:Pseudoscientists]] that we apply to [[Linus Pauling]] for his 
wacked-out ideas on nutrition?  (Of course, he could also get 
[[Category:Scientists]] for his more respected work.)  This sort of 
derisive labelling I find troubling, even if it's derisive labelling 
that's widely accepted.  The term "Alternative medicine", by constrast, 
doesn't carry nearly as much ideological baggage, because it can be read 
as either good or bad depending on your perspective, so more accurately 
simply labels a category of stuff without judging it.

-Mark