What is Science? What is Pseudoscience?

What is science? What is pseudoscience?

Allow me to give an answer to this question as far as my knowledge goes, and then to learn more, we will review two podcasts that I have linked at the end of this post.

When we talk about science and claim whether the method we use (or has been used) is scientific, two characteristics are considered for it:

1- It should have Replicability. Meaning it should be possible to reach that result again under the same conditions and by using the same method. Of course, the two terms Reproducibility and Replicability are sometimes used interchangeably. Sometimes they are considered to have the same meaning, and sometimes different definitions are considered for them:

In a review paper on the use of the terms reproducibility and replicability, Barba (2018) outlined three categories of usage, which she characterized as A, B1, and B2: A: The terms are used with no distinction between them. B1: “Reproducibility” refers to instances in which the original researcher's data and computer codes are used to regenerate the results, while “replicability” refers to instances in which a researcher collects new data to arrive at the same scientific findings as a previous study. B2: “Reproducibility” refers to independent researchers arriving at the same results using their own data and methods, while “replicability” refers to a different team arriving at the same results using the original author's artifacts. - Source

2- It should be Falsifiable. Meaning that propositions and theories must fundamentally be subject to falsification. In fact, it should be possible to design an experiment or propose an observation under which that theory or hypothesis can be refuted:

“In so far as a scientific statement speaks about reality, it must be falsifiable: and in so far as it is not falsifiable, it does not speak about reality.” ― Karl R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery

So if we propose a method and claim it is scientific, it must be able to satisfy these two requirements. This was what I concluded from this matter amidst my scattered discussions and readings, and I hope that even if it's not enough, it's a good starting point. Now with this introduction, it's time to move on to the podcasts:

This episode of the "Philosophy of Science" podcast discusses how science can be distinguished from pseudoscience. What "falsifiability", which Popper presented as a criterion for distinguishing science from pseudoscience, means, and what relationship exists between the philosophy of science and the history of science.

Furthermore, if you are also curious about the history of science and want to know more about it and why the history of science plays a fundamental role in understanding ideologies and thoughts, you can listen to the 29th episode of this same podcast titled: "Why is history so fundamental?". The guest of the program is Dr. Amirmohammad Gamini, who is a professor at the Institute for the History of Science at the University of Tehran and works in the field of the history of science and, specifically, the history of science in Iran and Islam.