La clarividencia es la supuesta capacidad de obtener información sobre un objeto, una persona, un lugar o un acontecimiento físico mediante la percepción extrasensorial.[2][3] Cualquier persona que afirme tener esta capacidad se considera clarividente.[4]
Las afirmaciones sobre la existencia de habilidades paranormales y psíquicas, como la clarividencia, no han sido respaldadas por pruebas científicas.[5] La parapsicología explora esta posibilidad, pero la comunidad científica no acepta la existencia de lo paranormal basándose en su ausencia de evidencia.[6] La comunidad científica considera ampliamente que la parapsicología, incluido el estudio de la clarividencia, es una pseudociencia.[7][8][9][10][11][12]
↑* Bunge, Mario. (1983). Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Volume 6: Epistemology & Methodology II: Understanding the World. Springer. p. 226. ISBN90-277-1635-8 "Despite being several thousand years old, and having attracted a large number of researchers over the past hundred years, we owe no single firm finding to parapsychology: no hard data on telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, or psychokinesis."
Stenger, Victor. (1990). Physics and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Senses. Prometheus Books. p. 166. ISBN0-87975-575-X "The bottom line is simple: science is based on consensus, and at present a scientific consensus that psychic phenomena exist is still not established."
Zechmeister, Eugene; Johnson, James. (1992). Critical Thinking: A Functional Approach. Brooks/Cole Pub. Co. p. 115. ISBN0534165966 "There exists no good scientific evidence for the existence of paranormal phenomena such as ESP. To be acceptable to the scientific community, evidence must be both valid and reliable."
Hines, Terence. (2003). Pseudoscience and the Paranormal. Prometheus Books. p. 144. ISBN1-57392-979-4 "It is important to realize that, in one hundred years of parapsychological investigations, there has never been a single adequate demonstration of the reality of any psi phenomenon."
↑* Gross, Paul R; Levitt, Norman; Lewis, Martin W (1996), The Flight from Science and Reason, New York Academy of Sciences, p. 565, ISBN978-0801856761, «The overwhelming majority of scientists consider parapsychology, by whatever name, to be pseudoscience.».
Friedlander, Michael W (1998), At the Fringes of Science, Westview Press, p. 119, ISBN978-0-8133-2200-1, «Parapsychology has failed to gain general scientific acceptance even for its improved methods and claimed successes, and it is still treated with a lopsided ambivalence among the scientific community. Most scientists write it off as pseudoscience unworthy of their time.».
Pigliucci, Massimo; Boudry, Maarten (2013), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem, University Of Chicago Press, p. 158, ISBN978-0-226-05196-3, hdl:1854/LU-3161824, «Many observers refer to the field as a 'pseudoscience'. When mainstream scientists say that the field of parapsychology is not scientific, they mean that no satisfying naturalistic cause-and-effect explanation for these supposed effects has yet been proposed and that the field's experiments cannot be consistently replicated.».
↑Cordón, Luis A. (2005). Popular Psychology: An Encyclopedia. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. p. 182. ISBN978-0-313-32457-4. «The essential problem is that a large portion of the scientific community, including most research psychologists, regards parapsychology as a pseudoscience, due largely to its failure to move beyond null results in the way science usually does. Ordinarily, when experimental evidence fails repeatedly to support a hypothesis, that hypothesis is abandoned. Within parapsychology, however, more than a century of experimentation has failed even to conclusively demonstrate the mere existence of paranormal phenomenon, yet parapsychologists continue to pursue that elusive goal.»