Science, Facts, and Pseudoscience - Notes

Science is the method that obtains knowledge about the natural world. It is an approach to learning information, not just a collection of facts.
Psychology is described as a science in the transcript, emphasizing that science is a method for acquiring knowledge.
There is a distinction between Values and Facts:
- Values = personal opinions, beliefs, positions; subjective; cannot be proven true or false in an objective sense.
- Facts = information that is tested and proven; objective and can be proven or wrong.
The motivation for science: pursued to avoid being wrong and to build knowledge that is backed by evidence.

Facts = tested and proven information; objective; can be proven true or false.
Values = personal opinions, beliefs, and positions; subjective; not directly provable as true/false in the scientific sense.
Science uses facts as the foundation for knowledge, not personal beliefs.

Science is an approach to learning information and understanding the world.
Goals of scientific inquiry:
- Describe phenomena
- Predict outcomes
- Determine causal relationships (cause) behind events or observations

Empiricism: science is testable and observable; relies on data from observations and experiments.
Critical thinking: involves skepticism and careful consideration of information; does not take claims at face value without evaluation.

Claims require evidence: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Falsifiability: a claim should be testable and refutable; if it cannot be tested, it is not scientifically meaningful.
Occam's razor: among competing hypotheses, the simplest explanation that accounts for the data is usually best.
Replicability: findings should be reproducible; the same result should be obtained when the study is repeated.
Rule out rival hypotheses: consider and test alternative explanations before drawing conclusions.
Correlation does not equal causation: a statistical association between two variables does not by itself prove that one causes the other.

Pseudoscience = a claim that seems scientific but isn't; it may appear credible while lacking solid evidence.
Characteristics of pseudoscience: claims look convincing but are not supported by robust facts.
Warning signs help distinguish science from pseudoscience (listed below).

Overuse of loopholes or excuses to avoid falsification of the claim.
Lack of self-correction when faced with contrary evidence or failed predictions.
Exaggerated or sensational claims beyond what the evidence supports.
Over-reliance on anecdotes rather than systematic evidence.
Evasion of peer review or critical scrutiny by the scientific community.
Absence of connectivity to established scientific knowledge.
Use of vague or meaningless language (psychobabble) to sound credible.

Distinguishing science from pseudoscience helps ensure information can be trusted as true or false based on evidence.
The scientific framework provides a disciplined approach to evaluating claims and avoiding errors in reasoning.
Understanding these principles supports better decision-making in research, education, and everyday life.

Use empirical evidence to support claims; seek replicable results.
Apply critical thinking; be skeptical of extraordinary claims without strong supporting data.
Be vigilant for pseudoscientific elements such as lack of falsifiability, peer-review avoidance, and overreliance on anecdotes.
When evaluating correlations, always consider the possibility that correlation does not imply causation, and seek mechanisms or experimental evidence for causal claims.

Correlation does not imply causation:
- $\text{Correlation} \neq \text{Causation}$
For claims to be scientifically robust, they should satisfy criteria like falsifiability and replicability (no single formula substitutes for comprehensive empirical testing).

Extraordinary claim example: A drug cures all diseases instantly with no side effects. Requires extraordinarily strong evidence and rigorous testing before acceptance.
Falsifiability example: A statement like "unknown forces control health outcomes" should be testable through experiments or controlled studies to confirm or disconfirm.
Replicability example: A study reporting a new effect is credible only if independent researchers can reproduce the effect under the same conditions.
Correlation vs causation example: Ice cream sales and drowning rates may be correlated in summer, but one does not cause the other; a confounding variable (warm weather) may influence both.

The distinction between empiricism and mere belief underpins scientific credibility in research methods.
Critical thinking and skepticism guard against accepting unsupported claims.
Recognizing red flags helps researchers, students, and the public avoid being misled by pseudoscientific ideas.
The process of testing, replication, and peer review builds a cumulative and self-correcting body of knowledge.

Science is a method for obtaining knowledge about the natural world, grounded in empirical evidence and critical evaluation.
Facts are objective, testable, and proven information; values are subjective beliefs.
Key goals: describe, predict, and determine causal relationships.
Green flags of science include empiricism and critical thinking; essential principles include falsifiability, replicability, and controlling rival explanations.
Pseudoscience mimics scientific language but lacks robust evidence and critical safeguards; beware warning signs such as lack of falsifiability, poor self-correction, and overreliance on anecdotes.
A careful, evidence-based approach helps ensure findings are trustworthy and applicable in real-world contexts.