5.5 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scientism | 2/4 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T02:56:23.727176+00:00 | kb-cron |
It is used to criticize a totalizing opinion of science as if it were capable of describing all reality and knowledge, or as if it were the only true method to acquire knowledge about reality and the nature of things; It is used, often pejoratively, to denote violations by which the theories and methods of one (scientific) discipline are applied inappropriately to another (scientific or non-scientific) discipline and its domain. An example of this second usage is to term as scientism any attempt to claim science as the only or primary source of human values (a traditional domain of ethics) or as the source of meaning and purpose (a traditional domain of religion and related worldviews). The term scientism was popularized by F. A. Hayek, who defined it in 1942 as the "slavish imitation of the method and language of Science". Mathematician Alexander Grothendieck, in his 1971 essay "The New Universal Church", characterized scientism as a religion-like ideology that advocates scientific reductionism, scientific authoritarianism, political technocracy and technological salvation, while denying the epistemological validity of feelings and experiences such as love, emotion, beauty and fulfillment. He predicted that "in coming years, the chief political dividing line will fall less and less among the traditional division between 'right' and 'left', but increasingly between the adherents of scientism, who advocate 'technological progress at any price', and their opponents, i.e., roughly speaking, those who regard the enhancement of life, in all its richness and variety, as being the supreme value". E. F. Schumacher, in his A Guide for the Perplexed (1977), 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, in other words, it didn't count." In 1979, Karl Popper defined scientism as "the aping of what is widely mistaken for the method of science". In 2003, Mikael Stenmark proposed the expression scientific expansionism as a synonym of scientism. In the Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, he wrote that, while the doctrines that are described as scientism have many possible forms and varying degrees of ambition, they share the idea that the boundaries of science (that is, typically the natural sciences) could and should be expanded so that something that has not been previously considered as a subject pertinent to science can now be understood as part of science (usually with science becoming the sole or the main arbiter regarding this area or dimension). According to Stenmark, the strongest form of scientism states that science does not have any boundaries and that all human problems and all aspects of human endeavor, with due time, will be dealt with and solved by science alone. This idea has also been termed the myth of progress. Intellectual historian T. J. Jackson Lears argued in 2013 that 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." Lears specifically identified Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker's work as falling in this category. Philosophers John N. Gray and Thomas Nagel have made similar criticisms against popular works by moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt, atheist author Sam Harris, and writer Malcolm Gladwell.
=== Strong and weak scientism === There are various ways of classifying kinds of scientism. Some authors distinguish between strong and weak scientism, as follows:
Strong scientism: "of all the knowledge we have, scientific knowledge is the only 'real knowledge'" (Moti Mizrahi), or, "the view that some proposition or theory is true and/or rational to believe if and only if it is a scientific proposition or theory" (J. P. Moreland), or, "only science yields epistemically credible data" (Michael W. Austin) Weak scientism: "of all the knowledge we have, scientific knowledge is the best knowledge" (Moti Mizrahi), or, "science is the most valuable, most serious, and most authoritative sector of human learning" (J. P. Moreland), or, "scientific knowledge claims are the most credible knowledge claims" (Michael W. Austin) A 2023 research article by Rik Peels in the journal Interdisciplinary Science Reviews explores the concept of scientism, defining it as the belief that science is the only means of obtaining knowledge and truth. Peels distinguishes between weak scientism, which limits the validity of science to specific areas, and strong scientism, which extends this validity to all fields of knowledge. The author argues that strong scientism is untenable and self-confuting because science itself is based on common sense assumptions and non-scientific principles. He proposes that scientism can be considered a form of fundamentalism, characterized by a Manichean narrative that is reactive against other sources of knowledge. The article suggests that science can learn from mainstream religion when it comes to scientific fundamentalism, by promoting a more open and tolerant approach to other forms of knowledge.