Anomalistics
Part of a series on the |
Paranormal |
---|
Anomalistics is the use of
Wescott credited journalist and researcher Charles Fort as being the creator of anomalistics as a field of research, and he named biologist Ivan T. Sanderson and Sourcebook Project compiler William R. Corliss as being instrumental in expanding anomalistics to introduce a more conventional perspective into the field.[2][4]
Anomalistics covers several sub-disciplines, including ufology, cryptozoology, and parapsychology. Researchers involved in the field have included ufologist J. Allen Hynek and cryptozoologist Bernard Heuvelmans, and parapsychologist John Hayes.[6][7][8]
Field
According to Marcello Truzzi, Professor of Sociology at Eastern Michigan University, anomalistics works on the principles that "unexplained phenomena exist", but that most can be explained through the application of scientific scrutiny. Further, that something remains plausible until it has been conclusively proven not only implausible but actually impossible, something that science does not do. In 2000, he wrote that anomalistics has four basic functions:
- to aid in the evaluation of a wide variety of anomaly claims proposed by protoscientists;
- to understand better the process of scientific adjudication and to make that process both more just and rational;
- to build a rational conceptual framework for both categorizing and accessing anomaly claims; and
- to act in the role of amicus curiae ("friend of the court") to the scientific community in its process of adjudication.[9]
Scope
In the view of Truzzi, anomalistics has two core tenets governing its scope:
- Research must remain within the conventional boundaries; and
- Research must deal exclusively with "empirical claims of the extraordinary", rather than claims of a "metaphysical, theological or supernatural" nature.
According to Wescott, anomalistics is also concerned with ostensibly
Validation
According to Truzzi, before an explanation can be considered valid within anomalistics, it must fulfill four criteria. It must be based on conventional knowledge and reasoning; it must be kept simple and be unburdened by speculation or overcomplexity; the burden of proof must be placed on the claimant and not the researcher; and the more extraordinary the claim, the higher the level of proof required.
Bauer states that nothing can be deemed as proof within anomalistics unless it can gain "acceptance by the established disciplines".[5]
See also
References
- ^ ISBN 0-8147-3564-9
- ^ ISBN 0-394-71602-7
- ISBN 978-0-8103-8843-7.
- ISBN 0-8103-8843-X
- ^ ISBN 0-252-02601-2
- ISBN 1-57859-029-9.
- ^ Science, 5 November 1999: Vol. 286. no. 5442, p. 1079.
- ^ Science, 14 May 2010, Vol. 328. no. 5980, p.854.
- ISBN 1-57958-207-9