正如我们所看到的，情感在寻找真相中也扮演着重要的角色，因为害怕被证明是错误的，这使得一些人关闭了发展他们的想法的道路，或者拒绝检查他们的假设，这样真理的真正知识就无法被揭示。摘自迈克尔·D·D的文章《从科学中分离伪科学》。戈登，我们对科学和伪科学之间的分歧有了一个很好的认识。伪科学和科学之间没有界限，因为这两个领域都可以增加人类知识的范围。正如Gordin所说:“如果科学家使用一些标准，如同行评议来划分界限，边缘也会如此。科学之光越亮——也就是说，它的文化声望和权威就越大——阴影就越明显，边缘就越繁荣。“边缘的伪科学将扩大知识的规模，因为伪科学从不同于普通科学的角度看待和研究事物。我们必须小心，那些对科学一无所知的人有可能会在非经验证据的基础上声称某件事是科学和真实的，这可能会让他们偏离轨道。在我们能够增加我们的理论或具体的知识基础之前，我们需要通过同行评审来证明科学家所做的任何主张是正确的。
新西兰留学生论文代写:从科学中分离伪科学
As we have seen emotion also can play an important role in finding the truth because being scared to be proven wrong makes some people close the way to develop their idea or refuse to check their assumption so that the real knowledge of truth can’t be revealed. From the article ‘Separating The Pseudo From Science’ by Michael D.Gordin, we get a good idea on disagreement in science between science and pseudoscience. There is not a demarcation between pseudoscience and science because both areas can add to range of human knowledge. As Gordin said “If scientist uses some criterion such as peer review to demarcate, so will the fringe. The brighter the light of science-that is, the greater its cultural prestige and authority-the sharper the shadow, and the more the fringe flourishes.” [4] The pseudoscience on the fringe will expand the size of the knowledge because pseudoscience views and investigate thing from different perception than normal science. We do have to be careful that it is possible that someone who doesn’t know anything about science can claim something is scientific and true based on non-empirical evidence which can lead them off the track. We need to justify any claim by peer reviews that scientist do before we can add to our theoretical or concrete knowledge bases.
