So, I started reading Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" today. So far, it is an excellent read. Sagan sets out to define the process of science in a way that's accessible to a casual reader, to draw a distinction between science and pseudoscience, and to equip readers to distinguish between scientific claims and those of pseudoscience, superstition, and mysticism. So far, I am really enjoying it, and I think it stands on its own merits.
However, we as worldbuilders can draw upon both sciences and pseudosciences as rich sources of inspiration. (There's nothing that requires phenomena unsupported by real evidence to be similarly unsupported by evidence in our constructed worlds, after all. Also, I find the concept of in-world pseudosciences compelling-- whether or not they keep the same status in-world as they do on this real-world list.)
Sagan starts chapter three with a cool paragraph, which begins: "Each field of science has its own counterpart of pseudoscience." He spins out quite a list, which I'm reproducing here in this thread, because I think it's an excellent source of brainstorming fuel. Sciences are bolded, related pseudosciences are unbolded and out to the right, and some of Sagan's comments are included in quotes, when I find them amusing or interesting.
Geophysics - flat Earths, hollow Earths, Earths with "wildly bobbing axes", rapidly rising and sinking continents, earthquake prophets
Botany - "plants whose passionate emotional lives can be monitored with lie detectors"
Anthropology - surviving ape-men
Zoology - extant dinosaurs
Evolutionary Biology - Biblical literalists
Archaeology - ancient astronauts, forged runes, spurious statuary
Physics - perpetual motion machines, "an army of amateur relativity disprovers", "perhaps" cold fusion
Chemistry - alchemy
Psychology - "much of psychoanalysis and almost all of parapsychology"
Economics - long-range economic forecasting
Meteorology - long-range weather forecasting "as in the sunspot-oriented Farmer's Almanac (although long-range climate forecasting is another matter)"
Astronomy - astrology
"The pseudosciences sometimes intersect," Sagan notes, "as in telepathic searches for buried treasures from Atlantis, or astrological economic forecasting."
Not all of this is totally clear in its meaning ("spurious statuary"?), but I've got a lot of the book left to go. I did want to put this list up, because I'm sure I'll find it useful as an inspiration, and so might you.
spurious ...== Easter Island and perhaps Olmecs.
Makes more sense than the other option... spurious laws :)
Cryptozoology should be added under Zoology, I think. Otherwise, a good and very useful little list, thanks for sharing :)
I'm surprised medicine isn't on though. They have a rich history of pseudoscientific or mystical branches like homeopathy or the humors :)
Well, it's not meant to be an exhaustive list. But I see no reason why we can't work it in that direction.
History - Time Travel, Revisionist History/Negationism
Possibility: Music as a pseudoscience under the physics branch?
Quote from: http://www.thecbg.org/mrwalkaway/index.php?page=contact.htmlpianists[/url]?
Quote from: brainfaceI don't think you can really call music a pseudoscience. I mean, piano-players, maybe. I mean, there's whole branches of music theory and technique, that have to do with aucoustics, and how the human ear works? Very details, factual stuff, I would imagine. But piano players are followers of a bunch of flim-flam, as everybody knows.
Maybe something like:
Real Musicians - pianists (http://www.thecbg.org/mrwalkaway/index.php?page=contact.html)?
You, sir, are an asshole
I would report your post, but then I'd have to read it again. :(
Quote from: KindlingPossibility: Music as a pseudoscience under the physics branch?
I don't understand what you're trying to say, here.
Quote from: brainfaceReal Musicians - pianists
due to hysterical laughter, I just can't quote this post hard enough
Wait, what did I miss?
Hmm, something I've always enjoyed in the same vein as this would be disproven scientifical theories. Phlogiston, lamarckism, abiogenesis, luminiferous aether, ectoplasm, and Doppler faeries (http://dresdencodak.com/2006/08/30/traversing-the-luminiferous-aether/) are all wonderful examples of this (okay, maybe not the last).
Quote from: Cataclysmic CrowHmm, something I've always enjoyed in the same vein as this would be disproven scientifical theories. Phlogiston, lamarckism, abiogenesis, luminiferous aether, ectoplasm, and Doppler faeries (http://dresdencodak.com/2006/08/30/traversing-the-luminiferous-aether/) are all wonderful examples of this (okay, maybe not the last).
I've been off-and-on reading a pretty interesting book (http://www.amazon.com/Discarded-Science-Ideas-Seemed-Time/dp/1904332498) on the subject.
The author has two related books in the dread trilogy: "Corrupted Science" and "Bogus Science", but I think "Discarded Science" is my favorite of the three. Perhaps that means I am an idealist?
Disproven sciences are great campaign material. The luminiferous aether is what inspired the great ocean in mare eternus.
Let's just call it:
Mathematics - Everything else
Quote from: sparkletwistLet's just call it:
Mathematics - Everything else
Lol
Quote from: sparkletwistLet's just call it:
Mathematics - Everything else
say
what(http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/1865/purity.png)
Quote from: sparkletwistLet's just call it:
Mathematics - Everything else
what[/i]
(http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/1865/purity.png)[/quote]Just... no.[/url]
Quote from: limetomJust... no. (http://xkcdsucks.blogspot.com/2008/06/sorry-ive-been-late-with-these-recently.html)
That guy is a complete tool. The entire thesis of almost every "criticism" this guy writes is just "Waaah, waaah, I don't like math humor, and anyone that uses math humor thinks they're better than everyone else."
Quote from: IshmaylQuote from: limetomJust... no. (http://xkcdsucks.blogspot.com/2008/06/sorry-ive-been-late-with-these-recently.html)
That guy is a complete tool. The entire thesis of almost every "criticism" this guy writes is just "Waaah, waaah, I don't like math humor, and anyone that uses math humor thinks they're better than everyone else."
agreed
I'm not sure what's worse, xkcd or an entire site about how much xkcd sucks
actually it's probably still xkcd
Quote from: PolycarpI'm not sure what's worse, xkcd or an entire site about how much xkcd sucks
actually it's probably still xkcd
:O It's like I don't even know you carp
Quote from: IshmaylQuote from: limetomJust... no. (http://xkcdsucks.blogspot.com/2008/06/sorry-ive-been-late-with-these-recently.html)
That guy is a complete tool. The entire thesis of almost every "criticism" this guy writes is just "Waaah, waaah, I don't like math humor, and anyone that uses math humor thinks they're better than everyone else."
He couldn't come up with something moderately funny, so he just picked-up something to complain about. Besides, it's not meant to be taken seriously, I don't get why is he making so much fuzz...
This might be the first time I've actually heard somebody criticize xkcd.
And can somebody please make the blogger stop saying cuddlefish all the time? Please?
EDIT: We should probably try not to derail this thread with an xkcd discussion.