The article deals with the relationship between academic psychology, pseudoscience and psycho-business. The first part discusses possible methods of eliminating pseudoscience. Described is the first Author’s provocation carried out in 2007 in the popular science journal “Charaktery”. Its main purpose was to demonstrate that it is possible for pseudoscience to be judged credible by journal editors and its readers. In the next step, reactions of the academic community to the provocation were classified and analyzed. Four basic strategies were described: ignorance, playing down, reorientation, and exploitation. In the further parts of the article there are presented results of a short study in which a group of students was asked to judge how credible and how interesting the therapy described in the provocation was. In readers’ opinions the text was credible. Based on these results the authors conclude that it is relatively easy to introduce a new fake therapy into everyday practice. The authors believe that the indifferent attitude of the psychological community may play a crucial role in this process.
The article is an answer to the commentaries on our article On psycho-business, tolerance and responsibility, or strategies of pure scientists. In the first part we summarize and comment upon the few proposals that have been made of how to counteract pseudoscience and psycho-business. In the next part we express our doubts as to the role and tasks of science that have been described by participants in the discussion. An analysis of the so-called junk science produced by the scientific community is presented in justification of our doubts. The subsequent part of the article is devoted to controversies related to differences in understanding of the concepts of pseudoscience, quasi-science and proto-science by the authors of the commentaries. We also analyzed the legal aspect of the provocation and discussed the issue of responsibility for its results, as well as answered the criticisms re: the placebo effect, limiting of the discussion solely to the area of psychotherapy, and the methodology of the research presented in the original article. A part of our article was devoted to answering some individual accusations and doubts expressed by the authors of the discussion. In summary, two points of view were juxtaposed. On the one hand the picture that emerges from the opinions shared by participants of the discussion is that threats presented in the original article were exaggerated and pseudoscience is difficult to define and control. In answer to this point of view, we presented facts that testify to the presence of pseudoscience in many high education institutions as well as in official curricula.
In this essay case studies pointing to problems related to the use of AI in shaping the virtual world are discussed. AI algorithms helps to shape and control the conventional web behaviour and speech of today’s media users, mostly teenagers and adults. Considering the development of software, social media may constitute a separate virtual world in the future. AI also shapes the image of this world and human relationships. The essay begins with an analysis of the future of social media against the background of truth; later, case studies show problems caused by AI to media users and the community. The authors attempt to answer questions such as: What kind of attitudes and abilities will be shaped in social media? What network ethics does AI dictate? What kind of attitudes and thinking will be promoted in the social media of the future?
Current research explored the link between beliefs about the mind, the soul, and the moral status (MS) of humanoid robot (HR). Determining the conditions for the assignment of MS to artificially intelligent agents is important from the point of view of their inclusion in the moral community. The indication of the role of beliefs about the mind and the soul is consistent with the tendency to distinguish these two incorporeal entities observed in folk psychology. In an online study, participants (N = 223), who believed in the existence of the mind and the soul, assessed the MS of the HR Sophia and assigned attributes to it; based on this, two dimensions of the mind perception (MP) were distinguished: Experience and Agency. As expected, we found that the participants attributed the mind more than the soul to the robot, and these projections significantly affected the MS of the robot. Path analysis revealed that the dimensions of MP acted as a mediator in the mind-MS relationship, while the soul-MS relationship was direct. The analysis of the obtained results leads to a more general conclusion that the soul attribution is a diverse and parallel condition to the mind attribution in individuals.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.