University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2020 Oct;83:97-102. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.04.002. Epub 2020 Apr 10.
The problem of establishing intensional criteria to demarcate science from non-science, and in particular science from pseudoscience, received a great amount of attention in the 20th century philosophy of science. It remains unsolved. This article compares demarcation criteria found in Marcus Tullius Cicero's rejection of genethliac astrology and other pseudo-divinatory techniques in his De divinatione (44 BCE) with criteria advocated by a broad selection of modern philosophers of science and other specialists in science studies. Remarkable coincidences across two millennia are found on five basic criteria, which hints at a certain historical stability of some of the most fundamental features of a concept of "science" broadly construed.
在 20 世纪的科学哲学中，建立内涵标准来区分科学与非科学，特别是科学与伪科学，这一问题受到了极大关注。但它仍然没有得到解决。本文比较了马库斯·图利乌斯·西塞罗（Marcus Tullius Cicero）在其《论占卜》（De divinatione，公元前 44 年）中拒绝天体命理学和其他伪占卜技术时所使用的划分标准，以及广泛的现代科学哲学家和其他科学研究专家所倡导的标准。在这五个基本标准上，跨越了两千年的惊人巧合，暗示了广义上的“科学”概念的一些最基本特征具有一定的历史稳定性。
