Fringe theory

A fringe theory is an idea or viewpoint held by a small

group of supporters. Fringe theories include the models
and proposals of fringe science as well as similar ideas
in other areas of scholarship, such as the humanities.
The term is commonly used in a narrower sense as a
pejorative roughly synonymous with pseudo-scholarship.
Precise denitions that distinguish between widely held
viewpoints, fringe theories, and pseudo-scholarship are
dicult to construct because of the demarcation problem. Issues of false equivalence can occur when fringe
theories are presented as being equal to widely accepted
theories.

Fringe theories meet with varying levels of academic

acceptance.[14] Financial journalist Alexander Davidson
characterized fringe theories as peddled by a small
band of staunch supporters, but not necessarily without merit.[7] Daniel N. Robinson described them as
occupying a limbo between the decisive dead end
and the ultimately credible productive theory.[15] However, the term is also used pejoratively; advocates
of fringe theories are dismissed as cranks or crackpots who are out of touch with reality.[16][17] In this
sense, there is some overlap with other dismissive labels, such as pseudoarchaeology,[6][18] pseudohistory,[6]
and pseudoscience.[19] Describing ideas as fringe theories may be less pejorative than describing them as
pseudoscholarship;[20] while it is unlikely that anyone
would identify their own work as pseudoscience,[21]
astrologer David Cochrane is proud to be a fringe
theorist.[22]

Denitions

The term is also used to describe conspiracy theories.

Such theories explain historical or political events as the
work of a powerful secret organization a vast, insidious, preternaturally eective international conspiratorial
network, according to Richard Hofstadter.[23] The conspirators are possessed of almost superhuman power and
cunning, as described by historian Esther Webman.[24]
Margaret Wertheim suggested that fringe theories should
be treated in a manner similar to outsider art. In 2003
she curated an exhibit at the Santa Monica Museum of
Art which was dedicated to the work of fringe physicist
Jim Carter.[25]

1.1 Demarcation problem

Wertheim wrote that a credentialed physicist ... can generally recognize a fringe theory by sight when it comes
in the form of an eccentrically formatted manuscript.[16]
However, it is dicult to distinguish between fringe
theories and respected minority theories. A workable denition of what constitutes a fringe theory may
not actually be possible.[1][2] This is an aspect of the
demarcation problem that occurs within both science and
the humanities.[26]

Part of the periodic table, according to Jim Carter's fringe theory

Fringe theories are ideas which depart signicantly from

a prevailing or mainstream theory. A fringe theory
is neither a majority opinion nor that of a respected
minority.[1][2] The term in general is closer to the popular understanding of the word theorya hypothesis,
guess, or uncertain ideathan to the concept of an established scientic theory.[3] Although the term is often used
within the context of fringe science, fringe theories have
been discussed in diverse areas of scholarship, including Biblical criticism,[4] history,[5][6] nance,[7] law,[8]
medicine,[9][10] and politics.[11] They even exist in elds
of study which are themselves outside the mainstream,
such as cryptozoology[12] and parapsychology.[13]

Geologist Steven Dutch approached the demarcation

problem by dividing scientic ideas into three categories:
fringe, frontier, and center, based upon their adherence to
scientic methodology and their level of acceptance.[27]
Later authors, including Richard Duschl, expanded these
categories. Under Duschls system, a fringe theory is a
1

REFERENCES

mix of legitimate new ideas and pseudoscience; it awaits Similarly, former mainstream theories such as phlogiston
analysis to determine whether it will pass into the fron- and luminiferous aether may be superseded and relegated
tier or be rejected entirely.[28]
to the fringe.[36]

Mainstream impact

Such shifts between fringe theory and accepted theories

are not always clear-cut. In 1963, Reuben Fine wrote that
mainstream psychology had adopted aspects of Sigmund
Freud's psychoanalysis but that many students of the discipline believed psychoanalysis to be a lunatic fringe theory which has little to do with scientic psychology,[37]
and psychoanalysis is now generally considered discredited, according to author Frederick Crews who stated, if
you consult psychology faculties in top American universities, you will nd almost no one now who believes in the
Freudian system of thought. As a research paradigm its
pretty much dead.[38]

3 False balance
The news media may play a role in the dissemination and
popularization of fringe theories. The media sometimes
reduce complex topics to two sides and frame issues in
terms of an underdog challenger ghting the mainstream
theory. Biblical scholar Matthew Collins wrote that this
simplication can be both misrepresentative and misleading, especially when a far-fetched fringe theory is,
in the name of neutrality and fairness, elevated to the
role of equally legitimate contender.[4] This false equivalence can become the expected media behavior. When
The New York Times published an article strongly supAlfred Wegener advanced the theory of continental drift, a fringe porting the mainstream scientic stance on the thiomersal
theory which was later adopted by mainstream science
controversy,[39] others in the media condemned the Times
for portraying the alleged vaccine-autism connection as a
The majority of fringe theories never become part of es- fringe theory, calling the article a hit piece.[40]
tablished scholarship.[17] Rejected ideas may help to rene mainstream thought,[29] but most outside theories are Issues of false balance also arise in education, espesimply incorrect and have no wider impact.[17] Neverthe- cially in the context of the creationevolution controless, some ideas do gradually receive wider acceptance versy. Creationism has been discredited as a fringe theuntil they are no longer viewed as fringe theories. Occa- ory akin to Lamarckism or the cosmology of Immanuel
sionally such theories even become the mainstream view. Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision. Because advocates of
creationism want schools to present only their preferred
A widely known example is Alfred Wegener's theory of alternative, not the entire variety of minority views, they
continental drift, which eventually served as the basis for have attempted to portray scholarship on the issue as bethe accepted model of plate tectonics.[17][30] Other ideas ing equally divided between only two models.[41][42]
which have made the transition include the germ theory
of disease,[31] Birkelands explanation of the aurora,[32]
prions,[17] and complexity theory in project management.[33] Behavioral nance was described in a 2002 4 References
journal article as at the fringe of ... modern nancial
theory,[34] but it has since been widely applied in many [1] Jasano, Sheila (1992). What judges should know about
the sociology of science. Jurimetrics: 345359.
elds of business.[35]
Sometimes this change is not gradual; in such cases it represents a paradigm shift. Writing for the New York Law
Journal, Andrew Bluestone described how a single court
case in New York changed the use of an obscure common
law statute regarding attorney misconduct from a fringe
theory of law to an accepted, mainstream cause for legal
action in the state.[8]

[2] Rundlett 2013, p. 5-88.

[3] Morrison, David (2005). Only a Theory? Framing the
Evolution/Creation Issue. Skeptical Inquirer 29 (6): 35
41.
[4] Collins, Matthew A. (2011). Examining the Reception
and Impact of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Some Possibilities

for Future Investigation. Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2):

226246. doi:10.1163/156851711X582541.
[5] Joseph, Simon J. (2012). Jesus in India? Transgressing Social and Religious Boundaries. Journal of
the American Academy of Religion 80 (1): 161199.
doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfr094.
[6] Fritze, Ronald H. (2009). On the Perils and Pleasures of
Confronting Pseudohistory. Historically Speaking 10 (5):
25. doi:10.1353/hsp.0.0067.
[7] Davidson 2002, pp. 125126.

[27] Dutch, Steven I. (1982). Notes on the Nature of Fringe

Science. Journal of Geological Education 30 (1): 613.
ISSN 0022-1368.
[28] Erduran & Dagher 2014, p. 117.
[29] Ullmann-Margalit 2006, p. 20.
[30] Bell 2005, p. 138.
[31] Velasquez-Mano 2013, p. 40.
[32] Jago 2002, pp. 270272.
[33] Curlee & Gordon 2013, p. 198.

[8] Bluestone, Andrew Lavoott (25 September 2014).

Judiciary Law 487 Cases on the Rise After 'Amaltano'". New York Law Review.
[9] Sabbagh, Karl (198586). The Psychopathology of
Fringe Medicine. Skeptical Inquirer 10 (2): 154164.

[34] Leong, Clint Tan Chee; Seiler, Michael J.; Lane, Mark
(2002). Explaining Apparent Stock Market Anomalies: Irrational Exuberance or Archetypal Human Psychology?". Journal of Wealth Management 4 (4): 823.
doi:10.3905/jwm.2002.320422.

[11] Quinn 2012, p. 143.

[35] Steverman, Ben (2014-04-07). Manipulate Me: The

Booming Business in Behavioral Finance. Bloomberg.
Retrieved 2014-09-25.

[12] Shiel 2013, p. 157.

[36] Shermer 2013, pp. 220221.

[13] Stokes, Douglas M. (1999). Reviews of Scholarly

BooksChristine Hardy; Networks of Meaning: A Bridge
Between Mind and Matter". Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research 93 (4): 366372.

[37] Fine 2013, p. 228.

[14] Abrams, Eleanor; Wandersee, James H. (1995).

How to infuse actual scientic research practices
into science classroom instruction.
International
Journal of Science Education 17 (6):
683694.
doi:10.1080/0950069950170601.

[39] Harris, Gardiner; O'Connor, Anahad (2005-06-25). On

Autisms Cause, Its Parents vs. Research. New York
Times. Retrieved 2014-09-25.

[10] Batt 1996, p. 206.

[15] Robinson, Daniel N. (2007). Theoretical Psychology:

What Is It and Who Needs It?". Theory & Psychology
17 (2): 187188. doi:10.1177/0959354307075042.
[16] Wertheim 2011, p. 4.
[17] Timmer, John (2009-11-09). Examining science on the
fringes: vital, but generally wrong. Ars Technica. Retrieved 2014-09-25.
[18] Magnusson, Magnus (1974-02-02).
Cagney. The Spectator (7597): 1617.

Mortar-board

[19] Thurs & Numbers 2013, p. 138.

[20] Fritze 2009, p. 18.
[21] Hansson, Sven Ove. Science and Pseudo-Science. In
Zalta, Edward N. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 ed.).
[22] Cochrane, David (2011-06-09). Proud to be a Fringe
Theorist. Cosmic Patterns. Retrieved 2014-09-27.
[23] Hofstadter, Richard (1964). The paranoid style in American politics. Harpers Magazine 229 (1374): 7786.
[24] Webman 2011, p. 8.
[25] Wertheim 2011, pp. 1112, 44.
[26] Hansson 2013, pp. 6465.

[38] PBS NewsHour: Professor Frederick Crews, PBS, 6 Jan

1999, retrieved 26 May 2016

[40] Ot 2010, p. 182.

[41] Edwords, Frederick (1980). Why creationism should not
be taught as science. Creation/Evolution Journal 1 (1):
223.
[42] Wexler, Jay D. (2006). Intelligent Design and the First
Amendment: A Response. Washington University Law
Review 84: 6398.

5 Bibliography
Batt, Sharon (1996) [1994]. Patient No More: The
Politics of Breast Cancer (Australian ed.). Spinifex
Press. ISBN 978-1-875559-39-8.
Bell, David (2005). Science, Technology, and Culture. Issues in Cultural and Media Studies. Open
University Press. ISBN 978-0-335-21326-9.
Curlee, Wanda; Gordon, Robert Lee (2013). Successful Program Management: Complexity Theory,
Communication, and Leadership. Best Practices and
Advances in Program Management Series. Auerbach. ISBN 978-1-4665-6879-2.
Davidson, Alexander (2002). How to Win in a
Volatile Stock Market: The Denitive Guide to Investment Bargain Hunting (2nd ed.). Kogan Page.
ISBN 978-0-7494-3803-6.

5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Erduran, Sibel; Dagher, Zoubeida (2013). Reconceptualizing the Nature of Science for Science Education: Scientic Knowledge, Practices and Other Family Categories. Contemporary Trends and Issues in
Science Education. Springer. ISBN 978-94-0179056-7.
Fine, Reuben (2013) [1963]. Freud: A Critical Reevaluation of his Theories (Reprint ed.). Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-415-71708-3.
Fritze, Ronald H. (2009). Invented Knowledge:
False History, Fake Science and Pseudo-religions.
Reaktion Books. ISBN 978-1-86189-430-4.
Hansson, Sven Ove (2013). Dening Pseudoscience and Science. In Pigliucci, Massimo;
Boudry, Maarten. Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University
of Chicago Press. pp. 6178. ISBN 978-0-22605196-3.
Jago, Lucy (2002) [2001]. The Northern Lights
(Reprint ed.). Vintage. ISBN 978-0-375-70882-4.
Ot, Paul A. (2010). Autisms False Prophets:
Bad Science, Risky Medicine, and the Search for a
Cure. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-23114637-1.
Quinn, Paul (2012). Anti-Catholicism, Islamophobia, and Modern Christian Multi-Media. In Ansari,
Humayun; Hafez, Farid. From the Far Right to the
Mainstream: Islamophobia in Party Politics and the
Media. Campus Verlag. pp. 130153. ISBN 9783-593-39648-4.
Rundlett, Ellsworth T., III (2013) [1991]. Maximizing Damages in Small Personal Injury Cases (Revision ed.). James Publishing. ISBN 978-0-93806555-5.
Shermer, Michael (2013). Science and Pseudoscience. In Pigliucci, Massimo; Boudry, Maarten.
Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press.
pp. 203224. ISBN 978-0-226-05196-3.
Shiel, Lisa A. (2013). Forbidden Bigfoot: Exposing
the Controversial Truth about Sasquatch, Stick Signs,
UFOs, Human Origins, and the Strange Phenomena
in Our Own Backyards. Jacobsville Books. ISBN
978-1-934631-29-4.
Thurs, Daniel L.; Numbers, Ronald L. (2013).
Science, Pseudoscience, and Science Falsely SoCalled. In Pigliucci, Massimo; Boudry, Maarten.
Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press.
pp. 121144. ISBN 978-0-226-05196-3.

Ullmann-Margalit, Edna (2006). Out of the Cave: A

Philosophical Inquiry into the Dead Sea Scrolls Research. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-67402223-2.
Velasquez-Mano, Moises (2013) [2012]. An Epidemic of Absence: A New Way of Understanding
Allergies and Autoimmune Diseases (Reprint ed.).
Scribner. ISBN 978-1-4391-9939-8.
Webman, Esther (2011). Introductionhate and
absurdity: the impact of The Protocols of the Elders
of Zion". In Webman, Esther. The Global Impact of
the Protocols of the Elders of Zion: A Century-Old
Myth. Routledge Jewish Studies Series. Routledge.
pp. 124. ISBN 978-0-415-59892-7.
Wertheim, Margaret (2011). Physics on the Fringe:
Smoke Rings, Circlons, and Alternative Theories of
Everything. Walker Books. ISBN 978-0-80277872-7.

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

6.1

Text

Fringe theory Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fringe_theory?oldid=722339769 Contributors: Gandalf61, Auric, Nunh-huh, Loremaster, OwenBlacker, Salimfadhley, Vsmith, Dbachmann, I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc, VoluntarySlave, Aarghdvaark, BD2412, Naraht,
Jrtayloriv, Warshy, Sandstein, Finell, SmackBot, B.Wind, Blueboar, Tim Q. Wells, Second Quantization, Smatprt, Americanhero, Andrewaskew, Hrafn, Wahrmund, Tom Reedy, JL-Bot, SamuelTheGhost, John Pons, Rhododendrites, Editor2020, Jytdog, Dbrisinda, C6541,
Verbal, Yobot, Amble, AnomieBOT, Srich32977, Logos, AJCham, Atomic blunder, Nederlandse Leeuw, GoingBatty, Solomonfromnland, ClueBot NG, Technovative, Helpful Pixie Bot, Northamerica1000, The Almightey Drill, Squeamish Ossifrage, Oct13, Autodidaktos,
SJ Defender, Portesamo217, Monkbot, Adam (Wiki Ed), Ah3kal, Jerodlycett, Jessicaarroyo, Permstrump, RandomScholar30 and Anonymous: 9

6.2

Images

File:Alfred_Wegener_ca.1924-30.jpg
Source:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Alfred_Wegener_ca.
1924-30.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Bildarchiv Foto Marburg Aufnahme-Nr.
426.294 Original artist: Unknown<a
href='//www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4233718'
title='wikidata:Q4233718'><img
alt='wikidata:Q4233718'
src='https:
//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/20px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png'
width='20'
height='11'
srcset='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/30px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png
1.5x,
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/40px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png 2x' data-le-width='1050'
data-le-height='590' /></a>
File:Circlon_periodic_table_excerpt.jpeg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/35/Circlon_periodic_table_excerpt.
jpeg License: Fair use Contributors:
http://theiff.org/exhibits/images/physicsonthefringe_clip_image001.jpg Original artist: ?

6.3

Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0