Difference between revisions of "Crank"
(added info) |
m (wikified) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
*Overestimation of one's own intelligence, knowledge, or proficiency. | *Overestimation of one's own intelligence, knowledge, or proficiency. | ||
*Underestimation of the intelligence of critics and peers | *Underestimation of the intelligence of critics and peers | ||
| − | *Belief there is a conspiracy to either suppress their ideas or artificially bolster the prevailing idea. | + | *Belief there is a [[Atheism and the suppression of science|conspiracy]] to either suppress [[Young earth creationism|their ideas]] or artificially bolster the [[Evolution|prevailing idea]]. |
*A tendency to attack the most well-established scientists and scientific theories. | *A tendency to attack the most well-established scientists and scientific theories. | ||
Mathematician [[John Baez]] developed a list of attributes known as the ''Crackpot Index'' which he bills as "A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics.<ref>http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html</ref>" The index contains a list of statements for the reader to consider, and assigns a point value to each item the reader agrees with. The more points accumulated, the more of a "crackpot" the reader is in the author's eyes. Some of the items include: | Mathematician [[John Baez]] developed a list of attributes known as the ''Crackpot Index'' which he bills as "A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics.<ref>http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html</ref>" The index contains a list of statements for the reader to consider, and assigns a point value to each item the reader agrees with. The more points accumulated, the more of a "crackpot" the reader is in the author's eyes. Some of the items include: | ||
| − | *"...claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence)." | + | *"...claim that [[Special theory of relativity|special]] or [[general relativity]] are [[Logical_Flaws_in_E%3Dmc²|fundamentally misguided]] (without good evidence)." |
| − | *"...arguing that a current well-established theory is "only a theory", as if this were somehow a point against it." | + | *"...arguing that a current [[Evolution|well-established theory]] is "only a theory", as if this were somehow a point against it." |
| − | *"...offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory." | + | *"...offering [[Kent_Hovind#.24250.2C000_Offer|prize money]] to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory." |
| − | *"...claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions." | + | *"...claiming you have a [[Intelligent design|revolutionary theory]] but giving no concrete testable predictions." |
== Crank style == | == Crank style == | ||
Cranks often employ similar tactics during debate. These tactics may consist of, but are by no means limited to: | Cranks often employ similar tactics during debate. These tactics may consist of, but are by no means limited to: | ||
*Routinely ignores the finer points that are prerequisite to understanding the mainstream theory. | *Routinely ignores the finer points that are prerequisite to understanding the mainstream theory. | ||
| − | *Failure to use standard methods of notation or terminology. | + | *Failure to use standard methods of notation or [[Baraminology#Baraminological_Terms|terminology]]. |
| − | *Attempt to redefine established terminology. | + | *Attempt to redefine [[Creation Museum|established terminology]]. |
*Ignore all evidence that is presented that contradicts their own hypothesis. | *Ignore all evidence that is presented that contradicts their own hypothesis. | ||
Revision as of 04:10, June 15, 2015
Crank (also known as a crackpot or kook) is the pejorative term for a person who hold beliefs or views that run contradictory to prevailing theories. While dictionaries may define a crank as "overly enthusiastic about a particular subject or activity[1] or "an unbalanced person who is overzealous in the advocacy of a private cause[2]", it is generally reserved for persons who hold radical ideas well outside of the mainstream in the areas of science and technology. While the term "quack" is used solely for a person who holds such views pertaining to the field of medicine.
Attributes of a crank
Famed science and mathematics writer Martin Gardner cataloged what he believed were the common signs of a crank[3][4]. First Gardner notes "...most important of these traits is that cranks work in almost total isolation from their colleagues" and that "a second characteristic of the [crank], which greatly strengthens his isolation, is a tendency toward paranoia." In addition Gardner highlighted some of the following characteristics:
- Overestimation of one's own intelligence, knowledge, or proficiency.
- Underestimation of the intelligence of critics and peers
- Belief there is a conspiracy to either suppress their ideas or artificially bolster the prevailing idea.
- A tendency to attack the most well-established scientists and scientific theories.
Mathematician John Baez developed a list of attributes known as the Crackpot Index which he bills as "A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics.[5]" The index contains a list of statements for the reader to consider, and assigns a point value to each item the reader agrees with. The more points accumulated, the more of a "crackpot" the reader is in the author's eyes. Some of the items include:
- "...claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence)."
- "...arguing that a current well-established theory is "only a theory", as if this were somehow a point against it."
- "...offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory."
- "...claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions."
Crank style
Cranks often employ similar tactics during debate. These tactics may consist of, but are by no means limited to:
- Routinely ignores the finer points that are prerequisite to understanding the mainstream theory.
- Failure to use standard methods of notation or terminology.
- Attempt to redefine established terminology.
- Ignore all evidence that is presented that contradicts their own hypothesis.
Quotations
“A crank is someone with a new idea -- until it catches on.” - Mark Twain