Fighting pseudoscience: FAQ

Pseudoscience is one of the regular topics of the Trinity Option, and she can’t see the end. The paradox is that in Russia, formally belonging to the modern civilized world, the forces producing pseudoscience are many times superior to those who confront it. On the side of the pseudoscience, central television channels are now and then (supposedly it is “sweeter” for the population than science), representatives of the authorities (such a level), an unscrupulous business (such a level of enlightenment among the population). A handful of journalists and a handful of scientists who gathered in the commission to combat the pseudoscience of the Russian Academy of Sciences, functioning on a voluntary basis, opposes the pseudoscience . The most famous cases of the commission are the confrontation between the “Torsional Mafia” and the battle with Viktor Petrica, is difficult, but generally won.

Recently, it would seem, the attitude of the authorities towards the problem has changed for the better: the government allocated 30 million rubles to fight pseudoscience, and it was assumed that this money would go to the aid of the commission and the general public will recognize the results of its activities. But with this money there was an ugly story - they came to completely different people, who had not yet been seen in the fight against pseudoscience.

But still, in recent years, the commission has received reinforcements, more important than money: competent people. One of these people is Alexander Sergeyev, a well -known scientific journalist, one of the most qualified people in the country precisely in terms of the confrontation of pseudoscience in the media space. He joined the commission, becoming the editor of her site ( Klnran.ru ), and has recently made several very relevant performances in the media. We asked Alexander to outline the situation "at the front." He chose the genre of answers to the frequently asked questions (FAQ).

Dossier

Official name: commission under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences to combat pseudoscience and falsification of scientific research
The date of the institution: 1998
Initiator: Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vitaly Ginzburg
Chairman: Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Evgeny Alexandrov
Composition: 46 people, including 26 academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Edition: The Bulletin "In Defense of Science" is released 2 times a year
Site: http://klnran.ru

1. In October, it was reported that the Ministry of Education and Science allocates about 30 million rubles to fight pseudoscience. What will these funds go?

These funds for the most part will pass by the commission. The tender of the ministry on the “Mediatization of the Activities of the Commission for Fronts of Fideuum” won the journalism faculty of Moscow State University, which will receive 25 million rubles in the next 2 years. The money is allocated for the popularization of the results of the commission, but not to the work itself, which is still being done on a voluntary basis, that is, for free. The tender was announced and won without consultation with the commission. Now it is discussed the possibility of the participation of the commission in the works on this state contract. But most of the work provided by him will not bring great benefits to the commission of the commission. At the same clauses of the contract that are interesting for the commission, difficult negotiations are: it is unclear whether the journalism faculty of Moscow State University can allocate the necessary funds from the money received by the state order.

2. What is pseudoscience? How does it differ from science?

It is often said that pseudoscience is any statements, explanations, promises that directly contradict firmly established scientific facts. In a first approximation, this is true, but it requires clarification. Science is a method of cognition to which we owe all the progress of civilization in the last centuries. By this, science deserved respect and special preferences in society. It underlies education, examinations, planning, and irregular money - grants are allocated for scientific research. Many people want to connect to this source of the well -being of science, without doing science itself or engaged in barren fantasies that are not consistent with the scientific method and are not recognized by other scientists. The struggle against pseudoscience is directed against stupidity and fraud, which take public resources intended for science - primarily material, but also attention, trust, respect - and waste them for extraneous goals. Pseudoscience is not erroneous scientific ideas; This is an unscientific activity, which is deceived or by a misunderstanding for a scientific one.

3. Is it not better to popularize science, instead of fighting pseudoscience?

Simple analogy: is it possible to replace fires with propaganda of careful handling of fire? The popularization of science is certainly necessary, but it is not enough. The struggle against pseudoscience is aimed at those holes that remain according to the results of educational and popularization. There are always these holes, but in Russia there are especially a lot of them now. These are large, state -level, pseudoscientific projects of corruption, these are pseudoscientific drugs and medical devices. Many of them pose a serious danger to the life of people who waste funds, and most importantly, time for ineffective treatment methods.

4. Will the struggle with pseudoscience give rise to the Inquisition leading the witch hunt?

The commission for the fight against pseudoscience is not included in the intelligence disputes. Ideological disputes between scientists should be decided at seminars, conferences and pages of scientific journals. Pseudoscience is a phenomenon that exists outside the scientific community, when an idea rejected by scientists is a deceit for a scientific or reliable one. If suddenly a brilliant scientific conjecture is not recognized as colleagues (this happens, although rarely), then this collision must be resolved within the scientific community, and not look for recognition from the public or officials who are easy to mislead.

5. Would the commission be used to information personal or political accounts?

Such a danger threatens any expert advice. However, it must be understood that it is impossible to seriously declare a pseudoscience an important scientific direction at the level of such a commission. If this happens, as it was in due time with genetics and cybernetics, then at the level of political decisions. This lies far beyond the powers of the commission to combat the pseudoscience, and if this happens, then rather, contrary to the will of the commission than based on it. The commission does not come up with that science and that pseudoscience, it relies on the opinion of the scientific community and draws attention to those cases when ideas rejected by a wide range of specialists are imposed as scientific.

6. Why does a special commission for combating pseudoscience exist only in Russia?

Russia and post -Soviet countries are in unique conditions. In our society, there is a collapse of rationalism and the disconance of a scientific worldview. Under these conditions, an abnormally large number of pseudoscientific currents blossomed. This is the most nutritious place for pseudoscience on the whole planet. In the world there is opposition to pseudoscience, but it is represented by public movements - clubs of skeptics and rationalists, societies of humanists and atheists. They lead sites, publish magazines, give lectures. However, in Russia, pseudoscience became the mainstream and deeply entered the public consciousness and the structure of government. Therefore, she needs to confront more seriously. In a good way, not just a commission that responds to the most egregious events is needed; A serious scientific study of the phenomenon of pseudoscience and the collapse of rationality in Russian society is needed.

7. What is now creating the greatest difficulties in the fight against pseudoscience?

One of the main problems is the inability to publicly call a spade a spade. Neither journalists, nor scientists, nor the commission can publicly call a specific figure to false scientists, and the products of a particular company - pseudoscience. The law in Russia is now on the side of false and pseudoscientific business. They may demand in court the protection of honor, dignity, business reputation. While the exposure of pseudoscience can be based only on the opinions of specialists. When a lawsuit was filed in connection with the damage to reputation, business and income, the court, as a rule, seizes the plaintiff, no matter how significant criticism. So specific projects are dangerous to call pseudoscientific. We have to speak only with general words and hints.

8. If the commission cannot even call a false person for false scientists, what can she even?

In some, most egregious cases, when it is possible to conduct the necessary examinations and collect sufficient support, it is possible to act against specific manifestations of pseudoscience, although this requires large resources and often ships. But in general, this, of course, is not enough. We must work on a change in the legal situation in the country. To do this, you need to create a methodology for examination for the presence of implicants in publications and projects and to achieve the adoption of regulatory acts prohibiting the spending of budget funds for projects and publications, recognized by the examination for pseudoscience. Now many pseudoscientific television programs, films and books receive support from the state. Thus, pseudoscience leads its expansion in Russia with financial support and legal protection of the state. Change this situation is a strategic direction for the commission to combat pseudoscience. And the commission should also be consolidated by healthy public forces, ready to withstand pseudoscience on the Internet, in the media, in education. It is necessary to coordinate these forces, helping them act more harmoniously to the benefit of science - this is the second most important task of the commission.

9. How can a simple citizen help the commission in the fight against pseudoscience?

Volunteer assistants should start by visiting the commission site and connect to the public support group of the commission on the Facebook social network, monitor the discussions arising there, disseminate the commission’s information, help to monitor pseudoscience, reporting on the specific cases that I had to encounter. Specialists are already helping the commissions to expose pseudoscientific myths, write expert conclusions, prepare publications. When the support group gains the number and strength, specific projects will be proposed in which volunteers can participate. For example, monitoring of the media for the propaganda of pseudoscience. Maybe a public campaign against pseudoscience as a whole or its specific species. And of course, it is necessary to distribute adequate information in social networks, exposing pseudoscientific myths.