Scientism

C

Cypress

"Cypress you motherfucking whore!"
Scientism: Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.

Scientism is the opinion that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality.


https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/...ke the use of the,about the world and reality.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
 
Cypress said:
Scientism: Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.

Scientism is the opinion that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality.


https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/...ke the use of the,about the world and reality.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
Click to expand...

Agree. Even some philosophers have been critical of scientism.
 
SIX SIGNS OF SCIENTISM

1. Using the words “science,” “scientific,” “scientifically,” “scientist,” etc.,
honorifically, as generic terms of epistemic praise.
2. Adopting the manners, the trappings, the technical terminology, etc., of the
sciences, irrespective of their real usefulness.
3. A preoccupation with demarcation, i.e., with drawing a sharp line between
genuine science, the real thing, and “pseudo-scientific” imposters.
4. A corresponding preoccupation with identifying the “scientific method,”
presumed to explain how the sciences have been so successful.
5. Looking to the sciences for answers to questions beyond their scope.
6. Denying or denigrating the legitimacy or the worth of other kinds of inquiry
besides the scientific, or the value of human activities other than inquiry, such as
poetry or art.

https://philpapers.org/archive/HAASSO.pdf
 
On a day to day basis, science plays almost no role in the cultivation of human knowledge and wisdom.
Science is obviously critical to grasping the mechanistic properties of natural phenomena.
But very few people understand or know particle physics, higher mathematics, quantum electrodynamics, and they don't really need it in the aquisition of human wisdom, knowledge, and veracity.
 
Scientism: A well worn WOKE manipulation tactic, using sciency language to push their religion, to push for UTOPIA. .
 
BidenPresident said:
Most of the world has nothing to do with science.
Click to expand...

As with most religions WOKE has a massive animosity towards science, but that certainly has not stopped them from wrapping their religion in sciency jargon when they see manipulative profit in it.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
And what about the things science can’t explain?

Do you just ignore them?
Click to expand...

That's the wrong question.

Most of human experience, knowledge, and wisdom doesn't depend on science at all.

In everyday life, the average person couldn't give a rats ass about quarks, Higgs fields, or string theory. There are no mathmatical equations or lab experiments which are going to define freedom, equality, justice, fairness, humility, moral virtue. That's why we need intuition, contemplation, and imagination as much as we need particle accelerators and differential equations.
 
Cypress said:
Scientism is the opinion that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality.
Click to expand...
You should have immediately seen the huge problem with this. Science never declares truth. That's what religions do. Science never confirms anything. Science merely keeps track of what falsifiable claims have not yet been shown to be false. Science says nothing about anything unfalsifiable, and that includes unverifiable speculation about the unobserved past.

Also, math captures most philosophical concepts that are not religious in nature. None of that needs to be discarded. Logic never needs to be discarded.

Given the definition you provided, "scientism" is not a thing. It's more of a pretense to discount via cherry-picking whatever one wants to discount.
 
Cypress said:
Scientism: Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.

Scientism is the opinion that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality.

https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/...ke the use of the,about the world and reality.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
Click to expand...
Seems rather limiting to Joe Friday's "Just the facts, ma'am" approach to life. Facts are important and form a foundation for our understanding of reality, but there's more to life than "just the facts, ma'am".

Anyone who knows how great a hot shower feels or a cold beer are on a hot day can't put those experiences into "just the facts, ma'am".
 
Cypress said:
On a day to day basis, science plays almost no role in the cultivation of human knowledge and wisdom.
Science is obviously critical to grasping the mechanistic properties of natural phenomena.


But very few people understand or know particle physics, higher mathematics, quantum electrodynamics, and they don't really need it in the aquisition of human wisdom, knowledge, and veracity.
Click to expand...
Disagreed. We're using applied science just to put these words into cyberspace. I don't know how to build a fucking computer, much less the IC chip, but I use the science. Same for driving cars, watching TV and washing clothes. Science plays an important part in many aspects of our lives second by second. At least for most Americans. Hermits in caves, not so much.

Agreed about the common lack of understanding of higher sciences, but we can use it to acquire other truths as you pointed out.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
And what about the things science can’t explain?

Do you just ignore them?
Click to expand...
Science can't explain a lot of things, but it's a good foundation for people to build upon. Example; most mothers know the difference between the symptoms of a cold and the symptoms of the flu. In one case she keeps the kid at home and in the other case she goes to the doctor. That learning is science-based. Specifically medically science-based. Why she wants to keep her kids safe and healthy can't be put into a math formula.

IMO, that's not what he's saying. No we can't and shouldn't ignore them, but, it's not a zero-sum game where you either understand science or love your kids. Sane people do both.
 
Doc Dutch said:
Science can't explain a lot of things, but it's a good foundation for people to build upon. Example; most mothers know the difference between the symptoms of a cold and the symptoms of the flu. In one case she keeps the kid at home and in the other case she goes to the doctor. That learning is science-based. Specifically medically science-based. Why she wants to keep her kids safe and healthy can't be put into a math formula.

IMO, that's not what he's saying. No we can't and shouldn't ignore them, but, it's not a zero-sum game where you either understand science or love your kids. Sane people do both.
Click to expand...

Actually nothing in science contradicts the Bible in fact it helps us understand the Bible better with the more scientific knowledge we gain
 
Doc Dutch said:
Disagreed. We're using applied science just to put these words into cyberspace. I don't know how to build a fucking computer, much less the IC chip, but I use the science. Same for driving cars, watching TV and washing clothes. Science plays an important part in many aspects of our lives second by second. At least for most Americans. Hermits in caves, not so much.

Agreed about the common lack of understanding of higher sciences, but we can use it to acquire other truths as you pointed out.
Click to expand...

I guess what I'm saying is that being able to turn on a television or type on a keyboard isn't real knowledge or truth. It's an ability to use technology, but I don't see it as any kind of profound insight or wisdom. On the other hand, gaining the knowledge to treat people fairly, acquiring the aesthetic eye to compose good photographs, having a keen sense of justice, cultivating the skill to be a persuasive speaker or writer is acquired by human abilities which don't require integral calculus or Newtonian physics.

I'm a science guy though, so I don't mean to downplay the scientific method.
 
BidenPresident said:
1. Using the words “science,” “scientific,” “scientifically,” “scientist,” etc.,
honorifically, as generic terms of epistemic praise.
2. Adopting the manners, the trappings, the technical terminology, etc., of the
sciences, irrespective of their real usefulness.
3. A preoccupation with demarcation, i.e., with drawing a sharp line between
genuine science, the real thing, and “pseudo-scientific” imposters.
4. A corresponding preoccupation with identifying the “scientific method,”
presumed to explain how the sciences have been so successful.
5. Looking to the sciences for answers to questions beyond their scope.
6. Denying or denigrating the legitimacy or the worth of other kinds of inquiry
besides the scientific, or the value of human activities other than inquiry, such as
poetry or art.
Click to expand...

7. Promoting a WACKY, unfalsifiable religion as "thettled thienth", e.g. Global Warming, Climate Change, greenhouse effect, etc ...
8. Disparaging non-believers of a particular religion, especially those of some competing religion, as being "denying of the science" or "science deniers."
9. The committing of active snake-oil fraud, e.g. ocean acidification, sea level rise, disappearing Arctic ice, "fossil fuels" running out, CO2 is pollution, etc ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top