PureX
Veteran Member
There have been a number of threads over the last year or so about the intellectual phenomenon of "scientism". But that isn't what this thread is really about. Although I am going to use "scientism" (and racism as well) to try and make a point I recently realized and think is important for all of us to consider.
In one of the more recent threads about "scientism" someone posted a video discussion on the subject that opened with the speaker saying something like; "If you don't believe "scientism" is a real phenomenon that anyone actually adheres to, then you are probably one of it's adherents". (I'm paraphrasing.) And this comment struck me 1. as an interesting idea in itself, and 2., as being VERY apropos in regards to the many discussions I have had with a few of the more obvious adherents of "scientism" here on RF. So I had to spend a little time thinking on this. And something finally occurred to me that explains why the scientism adherents cannot see themselves, or anyone else for that matter, as being adherents of "scientism", when it is glaringly obvious to anyone NOT under it's influence.
So let me use racism as a way of explaining why I think this is so. (And please, I am not accusing the adherents of 'scientism' of being racists.)
To a racist, (a race based bigot), there is no such thing as racism. At least not of the variety that the racist, himself, is party to. And there is a very simple and obvious reason for this once we think about it. And the reason is because from the racist's perspective and understanding of truth and reality, there is no bigotry involved. Because his bigotry, TO HIM, is simply reality. It's neither biased nor mean-spirited, it's just the truth is he sees and believes it to be. And he will only be able to see other people's racism, so long as it is not of the same variety as his own. Anyone that sees the world as he does, though, cannot be a racist. Because that person would just be a realist. As the racist, himself, presumes himself to be.
For example, if I believe that light-skinned people are inherently superior to dark-skinned people, then my thinking and saying so is not bigotry from my perspective. It's just reality. So should someone accuse me of being a racist, I would think they're quite wrong, since I neither thought nor said anything biased, bigoted, or mean-spirited. I simply stated a fact of reality as I see and understand it. And if someone told me that my next door neighbor, who also believes as I do, was a racist, I would likewise say and believe that he is not. That he, in fact, simply recognizes true reality, as I do. And that's not racism.
This is why racists never think they are racist. AND it why it's nearly impossible to get them to see themselves as being racist. Because to do that, we would have to get them to change their understanding of reality and truth. Which no human being is going to do without a fight, and a significant internal struggle. So it very rarely happens.
And this is why the adherents of 'scientism', here on RF, cannot see themselves as being adherents of 'scientism'. And why they cannot see anyone else being adherents of it, either. Because to them 'scientism' isn't a thing, it's just reality as they see and understand reality. And that reality does not extend beyond the parameters of 'scientism' such that it might be perceived and evaluated from an 'external' point of view. There is no other or external point of view to the adherent. It simply is what is.
But I'm not posting this thread to attack the scientism crowd.
The reason I think this is an important observation is because I suspect this kind of conceptual 'blind spot' exists within a lot of the reality/truth paradigms that we humans hold onto. Not the least of which would include a lot of theological paradigms. (Not to mention our economic and political paradigms.) Which is important to consider. Are the various truth paradigms that we hold to really as true as we think they are? Or are they just one of these self-blinding biases that we get ourselves trapped in, because we can't see past them?
And I guess the tangential question would be, do we even care? Or are we willing to just sweep the whole question under the rug so we don't have to face the difficult internal struggle involved in correcting and changing our truth paradigm?
In one of the more recent threads about "scientism" someone posted a video discussion on the subject that opened with the speaker saying something like; "If you don't believe "scientism" is a real phenomenon that anyone actually adheres to, then you are probably one of it's adherents". (I'm paraphrasing.) And this comment struck me 1. as an interesting idea in itself, and 2., as being VERY apropos in regards to the many discussions I have had with a few of the more obvious adherents of "scientism" here on RF. So I had to spend a little time thinking on this. And something finally occurred to me that explains why the scientism adherents cannot see themselves, or anyone else for that matter, as being adherents of "scientism", when it is glaringly obvious to anyone NOT under it's influence.
So let me use racism as a way of explaining why I think this is so. (And please, I am not accusing the adherents of 'scientism' of being racists.)
To a racist, (a race based bigot), there is no such thing as racism. At least not of the variety that the racist, himself, is party to. And there is a very simple and obvious reason for this once we think about it. And the reason is because from the racist's perspective and understanding of truth and reality, there is no bigotry involved. Because his bigotry, TO HIM, is simply reality. It's neither biased nor mean-spirited, it's just the truth is he sees and believes it to be. And he will only be able to see other people's racism, so long as it is not of the same variety as his own. Anyone that sees the world as he does, though, cannot be a racist. Because that person would just be a realist. As the racist, himself, presumes himself to be.
For example, if I believe that light-skinned people are inherently superior to dark-skinned people, then my thinking and saying so is not bigotry from my perspective. It's just reality. So should someone accuse me of being a racist, I would think they're quite wrong, since I neither thought nor said anything biased, bigoted, or mean-spirited. I simply stated a fact of reality as I see and understand it. And if someone told me that my next door neighbor, who also believes as I do, was a racist, I would likewise say and believe that he is not. That he, in fact, simply recognizes true reality, as I do. And that's not racism.
This is why racists never think they are racist. AND it why it's nearly impossible to get them to see themselves as being racist. Because to do that, we would have to get them to change their understanding of reality and truth. Which no human being is going to do without a fight, and a significant internal struggle. So it very rarely happens.
And this is why the adherents of 'scientism', here on RF, cannot see themselves as being adherents of 'scientism'. And why they cannot see anyone else being adherents of it, either. Because to them 'scientism' isn't a thing, it's just reality as they see and understand reality. And that reality does not extend beyond the parameters of 'scientism' such that it might be perceived and evaluated from an 'external' point of view. There is no other or external point of view to the adherent. It simply is what is.
But I'm not posting this thread to attack the scientism crowd.
The reason I think this is an important observation is because I suspect this kind of conceptual 'blind spot' exists within a lot of the reality/truth paradigms that we humans hold onto. Not the least of which would include a lot of theological paradigms. (Not to mention our economic and political paradigms.) Which is important to consider. Are the various truth paradigms that we hold to really as true as we think they are? Or are they just one of these self-blinding biases that we get ourselves trapped in, because we can't see past them?
And I guess the tangential question would be, do we even care? Or are we willing to just sweep the whole question under the rug so we don't have to face the difficult internal struggle involved in correcting and changing our truth paradigm?
Last edited: