In these remarks I make the attempt to draw a picture of the tradition, as well the modern forms of panpsychism, parapsychology and psychoanalysis. What connects these notions is situating those notions either outside the disciplines or at least on the edge of them. The problem is not just the fact that they did experienced various transformations and some of them did get closer to the criteria of being scientific. And on other occasions they distanced themselves from those criteria. Another issue is the fact that these criteria also changed what was considered scientific in one period, in another was perceived as pseudoscience, quasiscience or even parascientific. It had and still has to this day an important influence on what is often higher regarded in social terms. ie. pseudo- and quasiscientific theories rather than real science.

The spread of pseudoscientific beliefs and opinions is one of the more serious problems of modern societies. Pseudoscientific beliefs and opinions question the authority of science and may lead to serious harms to individuals and whole societies. In recognition of these hazards, the Committee of Ethics in Science of the Polish Academy of Sciences submits the following statement for the consideration of researchers, teachers in higher education and primary and secondary schools, as well as institutions which are responsible for education, and the society at large. The statement characterizes pseudoscience, its main causes and forms, as well as its key ethical aspects. It also contains recommendations for scientists and academic institutions on the appropriate responses to this troubling phenomenon.

In the paper I address the problem of consolidation of the borders of the world of science by scientific institutions—in this case, Polish scientific societies of various fields. Basing on the analysis of the statutes of selected societies, I formulate a list of research questions that concern the role of scientific societies in distinguishing between what is considered scientific and what is not. These questions can be used in a more in-depth research. I adopt a constructivist perspective, focus on the ways in which science is produced and separated from pseudoscience, and do not address the (in)accuracy of claims rejected by the scientific world.