Fact Check: "Astrology is considered as pseudoscience according to science"
What We Know
Astrology has long been categorized as a pseudoscience by the scientific community. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, astrology is often cited as a clear example of pseudoscience, having been tested and refuted through various scientific methods. The entry discusses the demarcation between science and pseudoscience, noting that astrology lacks the empirical support and falsifiability that characterize scientific disciplines.
Moreover, the Wikipedia article on astrology and science states that using the criterion of falsifiability, which is a hallmark of scientific inquiry, astrology fails to meet the necessary standards. Karl Popper, a prominent philosopher of science, frequently used astrology as an example of a pseudoscience due to its inability to produce testable predictions.
The general consensus among scientists, as highlighted in a Wikipedia entry, is that astrology does not possess predictive capabilities and is therefore regarded as pseudoscience. This view is supported by various studies and critiques that emphasize astrology's reliance on anecdotal evidence rather than empirical data.
Analysis
The claim that astrology is considered a pseudoscience is well-supported by multiple credible sources. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy provides a philosophical framework for understanding pseudoscience, emphasizing the importance of empirical testing and the ability to falsify claims. Astrology's failure to meet these criteria positions it firmly within the realm of pseudoscience.
Additionally, the Washington State University article elaborates on how pseudoscience often explains deviations from predictions through internal logical precepts, a characteristic that applies to astrology. For instance, astrologers may attribute inaccuracies in horoscopes to free will, thus avoiding falsification.
The Media Bias/Fact Check also defines pseudoscience as practices that claim scientific validity but do not adhere to the scientific method. This definition aligns with the critiques of astrology, which lacks rigorous testing and empirical validation.
While there are proponents of astrology who argue for its validity, as discussed in the Mind Body Baja article, these claims are often met with skepticism due to the absence of empirical evidence. The ongoing debate does not negate the scientific consensus that categorizes astrology as pseudoscience.
Conclusion
Verdict: True
The claim that "astrology is considered as pseudoscience according to science" is true. The overwhelming consensus among philosophers and scientists is that astrology does not meet the criteria of scientific inquiry, primarily due to its lack of falsifiability and empirical support. This classification is supported by multiple credible sources that highlight the fundamental differences between science and pseudoscience.
Sources
- Science and Pseudo-Science
- Science and Pseudoscience
- Astrology and science
- Astrology
- A Misleading Theory: The Pseudoscience Behind Astrology
- Pseudoscience Dictionary: Astrology - Media Bias/Fact Check
- The Science vs. Pseudoscience Debate: Critics and Proponents of Astrology
- What is the difference between science and pseudoscience?
