dual revolution

“ Recently some critics of science have drawn attention to the dangers as well as the benefits of scientific knowledge, and there has been something of a backlash against “science worship”.

Questioning whether in the long-term the benefits of science outweigh the costs
The concern is with the nature and status of scientific knowledge.

It is important to distinguish between science and non-sciences, and at the three theories how science works.

Science and Pseudo-Science
Science denote subjects such as physics, chemistry and biology. To people “science” is like a guarantee to something reliable, such as on medicines, to sell it to people.

Things that are considered as “scientific” by their proponents:
Acupuncture = the belief that by inserting needles into various parts of the body you can restore normal enery balance to relieve pain and cure various disorders
Astrology = the belief that our characters are determined by the celestial bodies (sun moon planets and stars)

We should be open minded about these theories, as it can be argued that to some people it has “come true” for instance to someone acupuncture might have worked and healed a disorder. so if such a science helps to alleviate pain then whether it is scientific or not, it would be stupid to ingore/condemn them.
“if million of people claim acupuncture helped them, why not accept it as a useful took in the medical field ?”
However, if we do go to such an extent, if acupuncture does work, why not try and find out how it works- this would inevitably involve doing such things as formulating.
Some people only believe in such things, if it is scientificly “prooved” or some just believe itis scientific because someone says it is.
e.g a racist might claim that his theories are based on biological research, but we are not going to take his word for it. What is needed is the criteria for distinguishing genuine science and pseudo-science (fake science).