Crank (person)

Crackpot is a derogatory intentioned English slang for a person with eccentric views ( " eccentric ", " Spinner ", "Crazy "). In its restricted meaning as "a person representing theories that contradict the current state of research ," the term has also penetrated the German -speaking web culture. Here Crackpot is often used synonymously with Crank (originally English for crank, in a figurative sense as well: " Spinner ", " strange owl ").

Use within the network culture

In science and network culture the term has different connotations in each case. In the network culture, it refers to a person who is unconventional ideas - often in the form of obsessive - makes its own and can no longer be by meritorious diverted from them. Errors in their assessments ( even basic ), which can be easily identified, are not recognized by her as such. Crackpots and seldom use scientific methodology, but argue with phrases like " It's logical ..." or " It is obvious ... ". Their expertise they relate mostly from their own interpretations of outdated theories or simplified representations in the media. A characteristic feature of Crackpots is the claim that their hypotheses could be a variety of observations of nature to explain better than current scientific theories. In support of their theories, they often use anecdotal excerpts from reputable scientific works which, taken out of context, seem to support their argument. In the field of web culture and concept formation as Crackpottery be (in German about: Crackpotterei ) and Crackpotism ( German about: Crackpotismus ) used.

Use within the scientific

Within the scientific discourse the term is used less restrictive. So defined, Brian Martin ( 1978) as follows him:

"Typical ' cranks ' are non - scientists who claimsoft serious consideration for ideas did Considered are unsupportable or outrageous accor ding to the currently accepted views of the scientific community. "

" Typical Cranks are non-scientists who demand serious attention to ideas that are considered according to the currently accepted views of the scientific community as untenable or outrageous. "

An early definition of Crank is:

"Few men probably receive more communications from earth flattener and circle squarers and arc trisectors than the present writer. When he does not feel Receives one he pleased, and yet it ought to be pleasant to think thatthere are so many men in the world who refuse to accept a dogma. A crank is defined as a man who can not be turned. These men are all cranks; at all events, we have never succeeded in convincing one of them. Whenthey use a term, sometimes evidently in two different syllogism, it is impossible to find exactly what they mean by it. "

"Probably only a few people get more letters from Flat - Earth - trailers, Kreisquadratoren angle and third learning as the author. Does he get to this so he is not happy about it - even though the idea should be pleasant actually, that so many people refuse to this world to accept a dogma. A Crank is defined as a person whose opinion can not be changed. All of these letter writers are cranks; in a single case, we were able to convince one of the falsity of his theories. If they use a term - sometimes even in two different syllogisms - so it is impossible to say exactly what they mean. "

Example of the use within the geosciences

In a study published in 2002 RJ Huggett are two basic types of Cranks. Firstly Cranks with " antrainiertem " ( meaning " indoktriniertem " ) or autodidactic knowledge, he calls it also " Creationist Cranks ', which are particularly loudly and tried to interpret the history of the earth by means of the specimens taken from the Bible " facts. " He cites the example Donald Wesley Patten, the author of books such as The biblical flood and the ice epoch (1966 ) (Engl.: The Biblical Flood and the Ice Age ).

For the second he calls "professional Cranks ", which would have an appropriate level of university education and were not affected by extreme religious beliefs in their judgment. This used a questionable methodology for their research activities, which borders on pseudoscience or the same is attributable. An influence of their cultural and social environment is not ruled out here. He cites the example of Immanuel Velikovsky, a controversial representative of catastrophism.

Furthermore, he distinguishes " conventionalists with a Crank- core ", which he further divided into successful and unsuccessful conventionalists. As an example of the former he calls Alfred Wegener, the founder of the theory of continental drift, for the latter he calls C. Warren Hunt, a geologist, the specific flood sediments with a 1,500 -meter high tidal wave, caused by a comet, wanted to explain.

After Huggetts definition Crank is not seen in the scientific sense as mocking or critical designation. The word designates only an extremely eccentric view regarding scientific theories.

Fred Gruen Berger tried in 1962 to describe Crackpot hypotheses. An important criterion for the subdivision scientific / non-scientific applies about that scientific theories should make predictions. Applying this attribute, however, to astronomy, so turns out that, although the astronomy according to common notion among the sciences that provide certain regions of the same not predictions, but merely describe specific observations as star densities measured or registered novae. Gruen Berger concluded that it is not possible to evaluate a hypothesis by means of a single criterion makes sense. The distinction between Crackpot science and real science is accordingly particularly for the layman, but often also for the expert difficult.

To help guide suggested Gruenberger before a points system, with which it should be made possible for the reader to evaluate scientific or supposedly scientific work. To this end this in 13 different criteria, such as traceability, experimental verifiability or the compliance with Occam's Razor, are evaluated. In his view, modern physics reach this 97 and dowsing 28 of 100 possible points.