| Abstract [eng] |
This thesis examines the construction and circulation of pseudoscientific claims in the digital public sphere of India, focusing on how such claims are articulated, interpreted, and acquire legitimacy across different actors and communicative environments. The study combines insights from the philosophy of science, particularly the problem of demarcation, with a sociocultural and postcolonial analytical perspective. Theoretical analysis confirms that classical demarcation criteria, including falsifiability, empirical testability, methodological consistency, and openness to criticism, remain essential for identifying pseudoscientific claims. However, these criteria alone do not account for their social appeal or persistence. The Indian context demonstrates that pseudoscience must be examined in relation to cultural traditions, identity formation, and communicative processes in which science, religion, and tradition are closely intertwined. Empirical findings show that pseudoscientific claims are constructed differently in the communication of politicians, spiritual leaders, and members of the academic community. These constructions rely on recurring mechanisms, including references to ancient Indian knowledge, selective appropriation of scientific terminology, analogical reasoning, and narratives of civilizational superiority. Such strategies enable the presentation of mythological, religious, or metaphysical elements as compatible with modern scientific knowledge. The analysis indicates that pseudoscientific character does not originate in traditional knowledge itself, but in its reinterpretation within public discourse. Symbolic or experiential elements acquire pseudoscientific status when presented as empirically grounded claims or as equivalents of modern scientific theories. This dynamic is particularly evident in the cases of yoga and astrology, which function as forms of experiential and interpretive knowledge, yet become pseudoscientific when reframed within the epistemic framework of empirical validation. The study further demonstrates that the circulation and reception of pseudoscientific content are shaped by digital platforms. Content visibility depends not only on epistemic credibility but also on speaker authority, audience configuration, and platform-specific dissemination mechanisms. Audience responses are context-dependent, as content shared within homogeneous follower communities tends to be accepted more readily, while the same content in broader environments more often provokes critical or ironic reactions. In addition, the evaluation of pseudoscientific claims is closely linked to interpretive perspective. In some cases, such claims are associated with the affirmation of cultural heritage and civilizational value. Consequently, criticism may be interpreted not as scientific assessment but as an external and culturally insensitive position, particularly when associated with Western evaluative frameworks. The findings suggest that pseudoscience in this context should be understood as a context-dependent and communicatively constructed phenomenon. Its analysis requires the application of scientific criteria alongside sensitivity to cultural and interpretive frameworks. |
