"No one in the history of the world has ever considered himself a pseudoscientist."

http://chronicle.com/article/Separating-the-Pseudo-From/134412/

September 17, 2012

Separating the Pseudo From Science

By Michael D. Gordin

"In other words, if a theory articulates which empirical conditions would invalidate it, then the theory is scientific; if it doesn't, it's pseudoscience.

That seems clear enough. Unfortunately, it doesn't work.
....................

On the other hand, "emotive work" is pretty interesting from a historical perspective. Scientists consider a great many doctrines to be wrong, even wrongheaded, but not all of them get labeled "pseudoscience." No one in the history of the world has ever considered himself a pseudoscientist. It is a term of abuse that is deployed by some members of a scientific community against individuals they consider threatening. By tracking under which conditions scientists denigrate others as "pseudoscientists," we can actually learn how scientists define healthy science at a particular moment. Instead of attempting to find a one-size-fits-all demarcation criterion, we should think about pseudoscience historically. This helps us understand how science functioned in the past as well as in the present."