The problem of establishing intensional criteria to demarcate science from non-science, and in particular science from pseudoscience, received a great amount of attention in the 20th century philosophy of science. It remains unsolved. This article compares demarcation criteria found in Marcus Tullius Cicero’s rejection of genethliac astrology and other pseudo-divinatory techniques in his De divinatione (44 BCE) with criteria advocated by a broad selection of modern philosophers of science and other specialists in science studies. Remarkable coincidences across two millennia are found on five basic criteria, which hints at a certain historical stability of some of the most fundamental features of a concept of “science” broadly construed.

建立区分非科学，特别是伪科学的内涵标准的问题在20世纪科学哲学中引起了极大的关注。它仍然没有解决。本文比较了马库斯·图利乌斯·西塞罗（Marcus Tullius Cicero）在其《占卜》  （De divinatione）（44 BCE）中拒绝采用家族占星术和其他伪占卜技术时发现的划界标准，以及由众多现代科学哲学家和其他科学研究专家倡导的标准。在五个基本标准上发现了跨越两千年的显着巧合，这暗示了广泛解释的“科学”概念的某些最基本特征的一定历史稳定性。