1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured "Scientism" on Wikipedia ...

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by PureX, Dec 2, 2021.

  1. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    21,595
    Ratings:
    +11,223
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    I was just reading some of the more recent additional information on wiki about "scientism", and could not help but notice the striking resemblance between many of the 'atheists' that participate on this site, and the characterizations being offered on wiki regarding "scientism". And yet whenever I've tried to point out these same characterizations to those atheists on this site who routinely express these exact same characteristics, they deny that they or anyone they know show any resemblance to them. Somehow, they are unable to see themselves as such even as they actively express themselves as such.

    It's quite puzzling, and it gives me the impression of there being some sort of cult-like phenomena involved.

    Let me post some of the characteristics of "scientism" from wiki and lets see if any of you self-proclaimed atheists, here, can see yourself in any of them ...

    "In the philosophy of science, the term scientism frequently implies a critique of the more extreme expressions of logical positivism[2][3] and has been used by social scientists such as Friedrich Hayek,[4] philosophers of science such as Karl Popper,[5] and philosophers such as Mary Midgley,[6] the later Hilary Putnam,[6][7] and Tzvetan Todorov[8] to describe (for example) the dogmatic endorsement of scientific methodology and the reduction of all knowledge to only that which is measured or confirmatory.[9]"

    "It has been defined as "the view that the characteristic inductive methods of the natural sciences are the only source of genuine factual knowledge and, in particular, that they alone can yield true knowledge about man and society"."

    (The term "Scientism") It is used to criticize a totalizing view of science as if it were capable of describing all reality and knowledge, or as if it were the only true way to acquire knowledge about reality and the nature of things;"

    "E. F. Schumacher, in his A Guide for the Perplexed, criticized scientism as an impoverished world view confined solely to what can be counted, measured and weighed. "The architects of the modern worldview, notably Galileo and Descartes, assumed that those things that could be weighed, measured, and counted were more true than those that could not be quantified. If it couldn't be counted ... it didn't count."[32]"

    "Intellectual historian T.J. Jackson Lears argued there has been a recent reemergence of "nineteenth-century positivist faith that a reified 'science' has discovered (or is about to discover) all the important truths about human life. Precise measurement and rigorous calculation, in this view, are the basis for finally settling enduring metaphysical and moral controversies."
    I have read many of the self-proclaimed atheists on this site paraphrasing many of these same ideals, often, and repeatedly.

    "God is not real unless and until God can be proven real by the objective methodology of science".
     
    #1 PureX, Dec 2, 2021
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2021
    • Informative Informative x 6
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Useful Useful x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  2. It Aint Necessarily So

    It Aint Necessarily So Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,041
    Ratings:
    +10,009
    Religion:
    None
    Seems to be a source of frustration for you that others use a different method of deciding what is true about the world than faith. I'm a strict empiricist. You've never demonstrated that your god exists. Why would I admit such an idea into my head?

    If you want to convince critical thinkers, you'll have to play on their field by their rules. They require a reason to believe before believing.

    And I see that you are still mischaracterizing the atheist position (your last line). You like to spend a lot of energy putting words in the mouths of atheists that few speak. You've never read that line from me or any other agnostic atheist, which is most of us.
     
    • Winner Winner x 8
    • Like Like x 3
  3. lukethethird

    lukethethird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,842
    Ratings:
    +1,405
    Religion:
    Xian
    "Scientism" is a pejorative term used by believers to misrepresent science, and so it goes.
     
    • Like Like x 5
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  4. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,658
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Well, we have at least one, that seems to claim to only have beliefs based on evidence and rationality.
    Another one is the only true way to acquire knowledge about reality and the nature of things. I have also spotted that one.
    As for induction one poster didn't know that Popper's method doesn't rely on induction.
    Others seem unaware of how come we have the concept of methodological naturalism.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Secret Chief

    Secret Chief Leaderless Animal

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,217
    Ratings:
    +13,627
    Religion:
    zen
    This seems to chime with much that I read on this forum.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  6. Lain

    Lain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2021
    Messages:
    1,559
    Ratings:
    +1,081
    In my opinion: when the nous is dead in the psyche anything can pass off as reason to a person. Sad days. Hence Psalm 6 (LXX/Vulgate) is given.
     
  7. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,658
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    So solve this one:
    "Naturalism's axiomatic assumptions[edit]
    All scientific study inescapably builds on at least some essential assumptions that are untested by scientific processes.[42][43] Kuhn concurs that all science is based on an approved agenda of unprovable assumptions about the character of the universe, rather than merely on empirical facts. These assumptions—a paradigm—comprise a collection of beliefs, values and techniques that are held by a given scientific community, which legitimize their systems and set the limitations to their investigation.[44] For naturalists, nature is the only reality, the only paradigm. There is no such thing as 'supernatural'. The scientific method is to be used to investigate all reality,[45] and Naturalism is the implicit philosophy of working scientists.[46]

    The following basic assumptions are needed to justify the scientific method.[47]

    1. that there is an objective reality shared by all rational observers.[47][48] "The basis for rationality is acceptance of an external objective reality."[49]. "As an individual we cannot know that the sensory information we perceive is generated artificially or originates from a real world. Any belief that it arises from a real world outside us is actually an assumption. It seems more beneficial to assume that an objective reality exists than to live with solipsism, and so people are quite happy to make this assumption. In fact we made this assumption unconsciously when we began to learn about the world as infants. The world outside ourselves appears to respond in ways which are consistent with it being real. ... The assumption of objectivism is essential if we are to attach the contemporary meanings to our sensations and feelings and make more sense of them."[50] "Without this assumption, there would be only the thoughts and images in our own mind (which would be the only existing mind) and there would be no need of science, or anything else."[51]
    2. that this objective reality is governed by natural laws.[47][48] "Science, at least today, assumes that the universe obeys to knoweable principles that don't depend on time or place, nor on subjective parameters such as what we think, know or how we behave."[49] Hugh Gauch argues that science presupposes that "the physical world is orderly and comprehensible."[52]
    3. that reality can be discovered by means of systematic observation and experimentation.[47][48] Stanley Sobottka said, "The assumption of external reality is necessary for science to function and to flourish. For the most part, science is the discovering and explaining of the external world."[51] "Science attempts to produce knowledge that is as universal and objective as possible within the realm of human understanding."[49]
    4. that Nature has uniformity of laws and most if not all things in nature must have at least a natural cause.[48] Biologist Stephen Jay Gould referred to these two closely related propositions as the constancy of nature's laws and the operation of known processes.[53] Simpson agrees that the axiom of uniformity of law, an unprovable postulate, is necessary in order for scientists to extrapolate inductive inference into the unobservable past in order to meaningfully study it.[54]
    ..."
    Philosophy of science - Wikipedia
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Useful Useful x 1
  8. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,467
    Ratings:
    +6,734
    It's always seemed pretty obvious to me. With objective reality, science has indeed proven to be our best means for determining truth. But with subjective reality, science is typically useless.

    As another poster used to say, science can tell me about the chemistry of paints and the properties of color, tint, hue, etc., but it can't tell tell me whether or not a painting is "art".
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Winner Winner x 3
  9. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    213,302
    Ratings:
    +81,131
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I can live with the slight.
    I'm starting to like it.
    Without it, they might say worse.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,658
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Well, there is more to it than that.
     
  11. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    14,296
    Ratings:
    +12,795
    Religion:
    Humanist
    What is Scientism?
    Why do only theists use the term?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Lain

    Lain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2021
    Messages:
    1,559
    Ratings:
    +1,081
    It was defined in the OP. In my experience, more than theists use the term.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  13. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,658
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Well, I am an atheist and use the term too.
     
    #13 mikkel_the_dane, Dec 2, 2021
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2021
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,658
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    His claim is not true.
     
  15. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    213,302
    Ratings:
    +81,131
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Many of them are.
     
  16. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,658
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Yes, but from many do not follow all.
     
  17. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    14,296
    Ratings:
    +12,795
    Religion:
    Humanist
    I've only heard theists use the term, but I'm one person
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    14,296
    Ratings:
    +12,795
    Religion:
    Humanist
    OK, in what context?
     
  19. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,658
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Just start reading the OP and check the names and sources.
     
  20. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    213,302
    Ratings:
    +81,131
    Religion:
    Atheist
    If we heathens started using it, that
    would take the wind from their sails.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
Loading...