The recent efforts for revitalizing traditional Iranian medicine (TIM) have shaped two main streams: The quackery traditional iranian medicine (QTIM) and the academic traditional iranian medicine (ATIM). The QTIM encompasses a wide range of practitioners with various backgrounds who work outside the academic arena and mostly address the public. These practitioners have no solid bases or limited boundaries for their claims. Instead, they rely on making misleading references to the Holy Islamic Scriptures, inducing false hope, claiming miraculous results, appealing to the conspiracy theories, and taking advantage of the public resentment toward some groups of unprofessional healthcare providers. The theories and practices of ATIM, however, can be categorized into two major categories: First, valid and scientific TIM that is aimed to conduct well-designed clinical trials and thereby, supply the evidence-based medicine with new treatments originated in or inspired by TIM. Second, a pseudoscientific part of the current TIM that is based on some obsolete medical theories, especially the medieval humoral medicine, and erroneous accounts of human anatomy, physiology, and physiopathology, mostly adopted from the ancient and medieval medical scripts. TIM has recently established some clinical centers for practicing humoral medicine that is partly pseudoscientific and involves significant risks. This paper suggests that the public health sector has a duty to act against the promulgation of medical superstitions by QTIM and the pseudoscientific medical practices of ATIM, and at the same time, support and promote the valid and potentially beneficial research pursued by ATIM aimed to explore the rich recourses of TIM and thereby enrich the evidence-based medicine.

The purpose of this paper is to assess Karl Raymond Popper’s “Criterion for Demarcation between Science and pseudoscience”. Here based on critiques of Larry Laudan, Imere lakatos, Thomas Kuhn, Harold Brown, and W. W. Bartley about the Criterion, new critiques about the demarcation theory are proposed. Criticizing the logical consequences of Popper is the model adopted in this study. In this assessment, Popper’s conventions for defining “Science”, is divided into three stages and every stage, in turn, is criticized.

Social media has become an integral part of our lives, influencing us in various ways. Instagram, one of the most popular social media platforms in Iran, frequently features psychological content. When psychological claims are presented to the general public through social media, it is called pop psychology. Despite the widespread dissemination of psychological claims on Instagram, no studies have examined Instagram psychologists or their typology; Therefore, this study aimed to identify different types of pop Instagram psychologists using descriptive criteria. Netnography, a form of ethnography conducted online, primarily involving continuous and in-depth observation, was employed as the research method for this study. Through continuous and in-depth observations, guided by logical principles and scientific evidence, we identified six types of pop Instagram psychologists: evidence-based psychologists, common sense psychologists, covert pseudoscientific psychologists, overt pseudoscientific psychologists, psychobabble, and mixed-type psychologists. This study demonstrated that pop psychology on Instagram is not a uniform phenomenon and manifests in various forms; Furthermore, we found that some types of pop psychology claims are more beneficial while others are highly detrimental. Further research could quantitatively validate the proposed typology or engage in deeper analyses of each type, examining both their characteristics and their potential positive and negative consequences.

The problem of diagnosing science from pseudoscience- widely known as the Demarcation Problem- has both theoretical and practical significance in philosophy of science. While for decades philosophers have tried to provide a satisfying solution to this problem, still there is no agreed answer to the question. The difficulties of demarcating science from pseudoscience can be divided into two main categories: challenges for defining a demarcating criterion, and challenges for applying the criterion to the occurred cases. Whereas most of the debates are centered around the first category, this paper focuses on one problem from the second one. Specification of the authority who possesses the necessary competence and legitimacy to discern science from pseudoscience is a difficulty for the application of demarcating criteria. It seems that the most complicated cases for this problem are those in which defenders of the suspected pseudoscience are themselves members of a scientific society. These cases are examples of a situation called “experts’ disagreement” in social epistemology. In this paper, I try to utilize insights from social epistemology about experts’ disagreement and complement them with the idea of “cognitive labor division” to overcome the challenge of finding the competent authority for identifying science from pseudoscience.

The skill and mastery of the Shahriyar in Persian poetry has always been studied in various aspects; from musical and weight to rhetorical structures, syntaxes and syntaxes, etc. Among these, Shriyar's penetration should also be another field of art. She knew Punish verses in the Shahriyan court have rhetorical, expressive and conceptual values. The number of copies of the verses containing the pencil in his court and his performance in this context from various aspects of literary, semantic, and. . . showed his deliberate and special attention to this issue. In this article, all of the questions concerning pseudoscience in the Shahriyar's sonnets, especially with emphasis on the three specific characteristics of the best pseudoscience, have been investigated in an analytical and statistical manner, in order to determine the general understanding of the style and manner of punishment in Shahriyar's To be lost. Issues such as: number of pencils, types of penetrations, unpunished ghosts, pseudoscience ghosts, pseudoscience in pencil phrases, pixel angle, pseudo-arranged arrays, subjects in pencil phrases, etc.

The popularization of science involves a broad range of activities, including the acceptance, understanding and participation in science that common goal it of bridging the gap between science and the general public. The aim of this paper is to investigate the importance of popularization of science in reducing pseudo-science in the Covid 19 period. In this paper, the method of documentary research has been used. With the prevalence of Covid 19 in the world, the importance of science and its popularization in the world to reduce pseudo-science has increased more than ever. Once again, humans relied on science, scientists, and experts to discover the corona vaccine. Considering that, one of the important goals of popularization of science is to fight against superstition and pseudoscience, critical thinking is one of the tools to combat pseudoscience.

Literature is a mirror of culture and social relations at all times. Health and medicine, as part of culture and social life, have had a place in literature for a long time. As one of the most popular literary styles, especially in Arabic and Persian literature, the technique of Maqama writing has had many achievements for scholars, including in the representation of social life. Badīʿ al-Zamān al-Hamad̠ānī, who is considered the inventor of this technique, dedicated one of his Maqamat to "medicine". This part has been forgotten throughout history and omitted from most manuscripts and all official publications. Fortunately, the Yale manuscript has preserved this “Medical Maqama” In this article, concerning the technique of writing the Maqamat and its historical and social contexts and goals, we report and analyse this innovative Medical Maqama.

Meaningfulness of religious propositions has been questioned by August Comte, sociologist, in the recent decades and has been intensified with severe support and predilection of Anthony Flew, Popper's disciple. By accepting falsifiability principle of Popper, that Popper himself had planned it for differentiate experimental science from pseudoscience against logical positivism, and by connecting that with meaningfulness, Flew structured a pattern and criterion for meaningfulness of experimental and other propositions, including religious propositions.By believing in experimental abolitionary of meaning principle and by accepting presumption of devout, that ((religious propositions do exist)), Flew concluded that only experimental propositions are capable of being abolished experimentally and despite the fact that religious propositions are existing rules according to devout, they are not meaningful, because they can not be abolished experimentally. Therefore Flew believes in meaninglessness and absurdity of religious propositions, because of lack of experimental evidences regarding their abolition, so he regarded all religious propositions uninformative and unabolishable (elimintivisim).In this paper, we try to show the structural methodological weakness of reductionism, exclusiveness, and empirical dogmatism by a critical review of Flew's theory. And we also try to pursue the idleness and baselessnes of his hypothesis on religious propositions.

The aim of this study is to survey the moral issue of the conflict between social actions and religious ethical values; it aspires to find the social causes of the issue. In order to find the causes for doing what is in conflict with moral values, beside referring to the theories of action, a new theoretical model is developed which is based on the multiple causality and relies on the logic of social status as well as the logic of collective mentality. The theoretical framework of this study classifies both subjective and objective factors that shape social actions that are in conflict with ethical values. The method of this study is surveying although other approaches are used where appropriate. The sample society of the research consisted of 435 high school students aged betweeI?-15to 25 years old chosen from the 3rdand the 15thdistricts of Tehran. The results, with %95 of assurance, aTeapplicable to the whole sample society. The findings of the research are as: 1- There exists a public opinion about religious ethical values. %98.5 of students accepted and believed in such values. 2- There is a divergence and conflict between the social action and moral values of the students. 3- Analysis of data justifies and explains the theoretical model and the existence of causal network of relations between subjective and objective RICOEUR, P, Le Conflit des Interpretations, Paris, Seuil, 1969 Sorokin, A, Fads and Foibles in ModernSocio1ogy, Chicago, H. Regnery, 1956 Wilier, D, and Wilier, J, Systematic Empiricism, Critique of a pseudoscience, Routledge,London,1989