Martin Gardner recently passsed on, and Scientific American is publishing various articles in tribute to him. Since we deal with scientific issues in the Environment/Energy forum, I thought it would be appropriate to post this one here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=hermits-and-cranks-lessonMay 23, 2010
Hermits and Cranks: Lessons from Martin Gardner on Recognizing Pseudoscientists
Fifty years ago Gardner launched the modern skeptical movement. Unfortunately, much of what he wrote about is still current today
By Michael Shermer
Editor's note: In light of the recent death of Martin Gardner, we are republishing this column from the March 2002 issue of Scientific American.<snip>
How can we tell if someone is a scientific crank? Gardner offers this advice: (1) "First and most important of these traits is that cranks work in almost total isolation from their colleagues." Cranks typically do not understand how the scientific process operates—that they need to try out their ideas on colleagues, attend conferences and publish their hypotheses in peer-reviewed journals before announcing to the world their startling discovery. Of course, when you explain this to them they say that their ideas are too radical for the conservative scientific establishment to accept. (2) "A second characteristic of the pseudo-scientist, which greatly strengthens his isolation, is a tendency toward paranoia," which manifests itself in several ways:
(1) He considers himself a genius. (2) He regards his colleagues, without exception, as ignorant blockheads....(3) He believes himself unjustly persecuted and discriminated against. The recognized societies refuse to let him lecture. The journals reject his papers and either ignore his books or assign them to "enemies" for review. It is all part of a dastardly plot. It never occurs to the crank that this opposition may be due to error in his work....(4) He has strong compulsions to focus his attacks on the greatest scientists and the best-established theories. When Newton was the outstanding name in physics, eccentric works in that science were violently anti-Newton. Today, with Einstein the father-symbol of authority, a crank theory of physics is likely to attack Einstein....(5) He often has a tendency to write in a complex jargon, in many cases making use of terms and phrases he himself has coined.
We should keep these criteria in mind when we explore controversial ideas on the borderlands of science. "If the present trend continues," Gardner concludes, "we can expect a wide variety of these men, with theories yet unimaginable, to put in their appearance in the years immediately ahead. They will write impressive books, give inspiring lectures, organize exciting cults. They may achieve a following of one—or one million. In any case, it will be well for ourselves and for society if we are on our guard against them." So we still are, Martin. That is what skeptics do, and in tribute for all you have done, we shall continue to honor your founding command.
This statement is particularly interesting:
"He has strong compulsions to focus his attacks on the greatest scientists and the best-established theories. When Newton was the outstanding name in physics, eccentric works in that science were violently anti-Newton. Today, with Einstein the father-symbol of authority, a crank theory of physics is likely to attack Einstein"
Some of the outstanding names in physics for environment/energy issues are
Amory Lovins,
Joe Romm,
Art Rosenfeld, and they all emphasize one of the best-established theories: the role of efficiency, "
Negawatts" and "
The Rosenfeld Effect". While a crank considers himself to be a genius, Amory Lovins is a recognized genius, having won the
MacArthur "Genius" Award - this seems to really irritate the cranks, because their most violent attacks seem to focus on him. A good rule of thumb: if someone attacks Amory Lovins, they are a crank.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
