Archive for the ‘Science-Religion Dialogue’ Category

Scientism:

Março 6, 2009

Gregory R. Peterson remarks that “for many theologians and philosophers, scientism is among the greatest of intellectual sins”. In fact, today the term is often used against vocal critics of religion-as-such. For instance, the philosopher of science Daniel Dennett responded to criticism of his book Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by saying that “when someone puts forward a scientific theory that [religious critics] really don’t like, they just try to discredit it as ‘scientism'”. Meanwhile, in an essay that emphasizes parallels between scientism and traditional religious movements, The Skeptics Society founder Michael Shermer self-identifies as “scientistic” and defines the term as “a scientific worldview that encompasses natural explanations for all phenomena, eschews supernatural and paranormal speculations, and embraces empiricism and reason as the twin pillars of a philosophy of life appropriate for an Age of Science.”

Range of meanings

Standard dictionary definitions include the following applications of the term “scientism”:

  • The use of the style, assumptions, techniques, and other attributes typically displayed by scientists.
  • Methods and attitudes typical of or attributed to the natural scientist.
  • An exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation, as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities.
  • The use of scientific or pseudoscientific language.”
  • The contention that the social sciences should be held to the somewhat stricter interpretation of scientific method used by the natural sciences.
  • The belief that some or all of the social sciences, such as economics and sociology, are not sciences (or not solely engaged in science) because they commonly do not hold to the somewhat stricter interpretation of scientific method used by the natural sciences.
  • The belief that scientific knowledge is the foundation of all knowledge and that, consequently, scientific argument should always be weighted more heavily than other forms of knowledge, particularly those which are not yet well described or justified from within the rational framework, or whose description fails to present itself in the course of a debate against a scientific argument. It can be contrasted by doctrines like historicism, which hold that there are certain “unknowable” truths. (this reference is no longer states this).
  • As a form of dogma: “In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.”