Misplaced Pages

Crank (person): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:30, 8 February 2006 view sourcePakaran (talk | contribs)9,746 edits Physics, computer science and mathematics← Previous edit Revision as of 12:40, 11 February 2006 view source Midgley (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,010 edits Medicine: there is anotehr page more specific, and being attacked from one sideNext edit →
Line 55: Line 55:
* ]. * ].
* ]. * ].
* ] (and particularly claimed connections between ]). * ] and "vaccine critics" in the ] (and particularly claimed connections between ]).
* ] (see this same entry under the topic of ''Paranormal and spiritual''). * ] (see this same entry under the topic of ''Paranormal and spiritual'').
* ], especially when used in (pseudo-)] diagnosis. * ], especially when used in (pseudo-)] diagnosis.

Revision as of 12:40, 11 February 2006

"Crank" (or kook, crackpot, or quack) is a pejorative term for a person who writes or speaks in an authoritative fashion about a particular subject, often of a scientific or pseudo-scientific nature, but is perceived as holding false or even ludicrous beliefs. Crank is also used as a noun to describe the opinions of such people (see American Heritage Dictionary 2000 - noun definition 3). Usage of the label is often subjective, with proponents of competing theories labeling each other cranks, but the term principally refers to someone who occupies a position outside of widely accepted beliefs or mainstream opinion on a matter, as well as a person of dubious mental stability.

The belief that the earth revolves around the sun was once considered a crank belief, so the mainstream consensus on crank beliefs can change. On the other hand, while most cranks think of or portray themselves as a new Galileo whose superior insight will be vindicated, for every Galileo there are thousands of cranks who are just plain wrong.

Crank tactics

Regardless of whether they are acting in good faith, cranks in all subject areas use similar tactics in their attempts to persuade the general public. The following set of tactics are deployed by science cranks:

  • The (apparent) offering of cash rewards to anyone who disproves a (scientific) theory
  • Grandiose claims for the validity and scope of the theory
  • Stated belief that a conspiracy by the scientific establishment is hindering uptake of their own theory
  • Use of neologisms without proper definition
  • Comparison of the originator with Einstein, Newton, Galileo, or Copernicus
  • Direct communication of the idea to the media, typically holding a press conference before going through the usual peer review process of publishing in scholarly journals (this was one reason for criticism of cold fusion, the discoverers of which held a press conference before their claims had been replicated)
  • Observable effects of the theory are at or beyond the limits of detection (see N-rays; some skeptics also associate this tactic with superstrings)
  • Lack of a working prototype where one might expect it to convince a skeptical audience (see perpetual motion)
  • Extensive use of testimonials, e.g. in advertising, where testimonials by users of a crank therapy make claims that would be against FDA anti-fraud regulations if the purveyor were to make the claims outright
  • Claims that something is proved to work because there is a patent on it, when the patent is actually a design patent, which protects only ornamentation, rather than a utility patent, or when the patent only covers an insignificant aspect of the patented subject matter
    • Related: Claims that something must work because it has a patent pending on it, when standard patent office stall tactics have been used to delay the pendency of the patent application, sometimes for up to several decades

Cranks on the Internet

Science fiction author and critic Bruce Sterling noted in his essay in CATSCAN 13 :

There's supposed to be a lot of difference between the hurtful online statement "You're a moron," and the tastefully facetious statement "You're a moron :-)". I question whether this is really the case, emoticon or no. And even the emoticon doesn't help much in one's halting interaction with the occasional online stranger who is, in fact, gravely sociopathic. Online communication can wonderfully liberate the tender soul of some well-meaning personage who, for whatever reason, is physically uncharismatic. Unfortunately, online communication also fertilizes the eccentricities of hopeless cranks, who at last find themselves in firm possession of a wondrous soapbox that the Trilateral Commission and the Men In Black had previously denied them.

Related terminology

"Kook" is a somewhat similar pejorative term that is usually used to describe a person whose areas of interest are perceived to be eccentric, fantastic, or insane. A person may be said to be a "kook" if they are seen to hold socially unacceptable beliefs, or perceptions that outrageously conflict with known scientific results, and appear to base their entire world views upon them. The term was coined in 1960 and originates from the word cuckoo, which is also the name of a bird, but which is also pejoratively associated with mental illness.

Predictably, "kooks" tend to draw criticism and generate controversy; it has been speculated that some kooks are motivated by a desire for such attention.

Topics typically associated with the "crank" label

Physics, computer science and mathematics

Medicine

Nutrition

  • Diets that forbid or severely limit one or more necessary nutrients. Examples include extreme low-carbohydrate or low-fat diets.
  • Those who consider common foods, such as milk or wheat, harmful or even fatal to everyone, including those with no history of food allergies or of anaphylaxis.
  • Macrobiotics.
  • Water fluoridation opponents.
  • Raw food diets to the extent that cooked food is believed to be actively harmful (as opposed, for example, to claims that certain vitamins are lost in cooking, which are not disputed).
  • Those who believe cancer is caused by deficiency of an unknown vitamin.

Politics, economics, and law

Paranormal and spiritual

See also

External links

Categories:
Crank (person): Difference between revisions Add topic