|
|
|
|
|
|
PROTOSCIENCE
 |
The factual accuracy of this article or section is disputed.
Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page. |
Protoscience is a field of study that appears to conform to the scientific method, but is either not falsifiable or not yet accepted as science or verified by a consensus of scientists, yet has the potential to become accepted as a science upon further research and verification.
History of the term
The philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn first used the word in an essay published in 1974:
...there are many fields — I shall call them proto-sciences — in which practice does generate testable conclusions but which nevertheless resemble philosophy and the arts rather than the established sciences in their developmental patterns. I think, for example, of fields like chemistry and electricity before the mid-eighteenth century, of the study of heredity and phylogeny before the mid-nineteenth, or of many of the social sciences today. In these fields, too, though they satisfy Sir Karl's demarcation criterion, incessant criticism and continual striving for a fresh start are primary forces, and need to be. No more than in philosophy and the arts, however, do they result in clear-cut progress.
I conclude, in short, that the proto-sciences, like the arts and philosophy, lack some element which, in the mature sciences, permits the more obvious forms of progress. It is not, however, anything that a methodological prescription can provide....I claim no therapy to assist the transformation of a proto-science to a science, nor do I suppose anything of this sort is to be had.
— Thomas Kuhn, Criticism and the growth of knowledge[1]
Examples
-
Early philosophical disciplines that later evolved into branches of modern science are considered to be protosciences.
Footnotes
- ^ Speekenbrink, Maarten (2003-10-28). "De Ongegronde Eis tot Consensus in de Psychologische" (
 PDF). Retrieved on 2006-08-02.
See also
External links
|
|
|
|
|
|
|