SCIENCE VERSUS PSEUDOSCIENCE: A DUEL STILL FACED?/CIENCIA VERSUS PSEUDOCIENCIA: UM DUELO AINDA ENFRENTADO?

The complex debate on the problem of demarcation and the lack of consensus on criteria capable of distinguishing science from pseudoscience, led to the realization of this theoretical essay, which aimed to reflect on the validity in discussing what is scientific knowledge and what is not, in philosophical terms. To this end, a review was initially carried out on the history of the demarcation problem, which started with Aristotle and instigates researchers until today. Subsequently, contemporary research that addressed the problem of demarcation was reviewed, in order to identify what positions current scientists are taking in relation to scientific knowledge. Laudan (1983) was used as a basis for the discussion, stating that the philosophical milieu has failed to demarcate science, in view of this it is proposed that the problem of demarcation continue to be discussed, but with emphasis on the empirical and conceptual field. Finally, based on Jakovljevic and Ostojic (2016), a series of characteristics stood out for analysis by both researchers and journal reviewers, which can play an important role in ensuring publications with reliable knowledge, including in the areas of applied social, such as accounting sciences.