Illustrate the essence of quasi-science and para-science

Scientific cognition has traditionally been the principal object of epistemological studies. As a rule it has been viewed as the most refined manifestation of cognition, while other methods are interpreted as less reliable, capable at the best case of serve as supplementary ones to scientific knowledge, And in many cases totally contradicting the scientific approach. To separate scientific knowledge from extra-scientific layers have found their realization in the task of demarcation. In general, it is possible to quote the following major ological specification. In order to denote any cognition which comes From the scientific one, it is worth to use the term "nonscientific", as the "non-" prefix may mean that the cognition simply Stands from the scientific one, or that the cognition contradicts to the scientific one. As for cognition which does Not contradict the scientific one, though no beyond its borders, maybe it is the most appropriate to use the term "extra-scientific" For the same same, the notion "anti-scientific" bears a vivid expression of being to the scientific, and Therefore it is appropriate to use this notion To mark those concepts which are based on the norms and principles openly opposing the credits ones. Along with this, a significant parts of these concepts do not openly declare their fundamental difference from science, but try to imitate It is called as not what is not known. Ambiguous ience, "false science" and "quasi-science", for the corresponding prefixes denote the very fact of attempting to pass as science what is not science. Ambiguous, Because the prefix "para-" may mean adjacency (in this meaning "parascience" is used by AA Ivin), as well as digression,