Scientism

[justlookinla]

"Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints."

Agree or disagree?

 

[Phenotype]

I'll have a crack at answering the question.

A scientific hypothesis is tentatively proposed as it must be vulnerable to falsifiability if it is to even deserve consideration. Claims to the supernatural fail this criterion. They are vacuous.

Evidence for the hypothesis is tested to destruction, through experimentation, data analysis. Only the good theories survive peer review, to pass into substantive knowledge, which accumulates our body of knowledge, ever more defining, approximating 'reality.' We cannot assert that we have completely explained reality. The quest for such induces and inspires scientific endeavour, for the exhiliration of discovery, also given the chance at peer recognition and fame. The quest for a Theory of Everything continues apace and is a valid one.

Scholarship, as in the Social Sciences is becoming ever more empirical in its contribution to understandings.

Are you trying to delimit science? Why would you be seeking to do that?

 

[justlookinla]

I'll have a crack at answering the question.

A scientific hypothesis is tentatively proposed as it must be vulnerable to falsifiability if it is to even deserve consideration. Claims to the supernatural fail this criterion. They are vacuous.

Evidence for the hypothesis is tested to destruction, through experimentation, data analysis. Only the good theories survive peer review, to pass into substantive knowledge, which accumulates our body of knowledge, ever more defining, approximating 'reality.' We cannot assert that we have completely explained reality. The quest for such induces and inspires scientific endeavour, for the exhiliration of discovery, also given the chance at peer recognition and fame. The quest for a Theory of Everything continues apace and is a valid one.

Scholarship, as in the Social Sciences is becoming ever more empirical in its contribution to understandings.

Are you trying to delimit science? Why would you be seeking to do that?

You didn't answer the questions...now, again.....

Do you disagree with the statement that "empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning"?

What would be more valuable within human learning, than science, in your opinion?

 

[VirOptimus]

Science is just a way of describing and examining physical reality, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[justlookinla]

Science is just a way of describing and examining physical reality, nothing more, nothing less.

Nothing wrong with that.

Scientism on the other hand is just another philosophical worldview.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nothing wrong with that.

Scientism on the other hand is just another philosophical worldview.

And yet you can show no actual support for your claim of the existence of "Scientism". Since you made the claim the burden of proof is upon you. I have not seen any evidence showing that this so called "Scientism" exists, or if it does that it matches your definition. You have a lot of work to do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please answer the questions.

When you ask proper questions you will get proper answers. Leading questions are not proper questions.

 

[justlookinla]

And yet you can show no actual support for your claim of the existence of "Scientism". Since you made the claim the burden of proof is upon you. I have not seen any evidence showing that this so called "Scientism" exists, or if it does that it matches your definition. You have a lot of work to do.

You then disagree with the statement that "empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning"?

What would be more valuable within human learning, than science, in your opinion?

 

[justlookinla]

When you ask proper questions you will get proper answers. Leading questions are not proper questions.

What's improper about the question? The only thing that's improper is your repeated evasion concerning the questions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What's improper about the question? The only thing that's improper is your repeated evasion concerning the questions.

I already told you. Go back an reread the past posts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You then disagree with the statement that "empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning"?

What would be more valuable within human learning, than science, in your opinion?

What did I tell you about improper questions?

Go back and read prior posts please.

 

[TasManOfGod]

Scientism sounds to me to be "silly science" ie science with an agenda not actually based on fact

 

[Papias]

lookin wrote:

"empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning"

Others may not have been clear, but your asking for a "yes or no" answer to a question that has two separate statements in it is a problem. It's a problem because too often, it is used as a rhetorical trick to make someone appear to be stupid.

For instance, if I asked you "Do you agree with the statement "gravity is real or fish need bicycles." yes or no?"

You could say "yes", in which case I ridicule you for saying that fish need bicycles, or you could say "no", in which case I ridicule you for saying that gravity isn't real.

So, no need to fight here. Why not just ask them as two separate questions:

1. Is empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview? By that, do you mean, most likely to be true? Note, I don't think empirical science excludes the possibility of a God.

2. Is empirical science the most valuable part of human learning? Define "valuable"?

This is why it may be useful to separate them. Unless, of course, your original intent was to trick and attack, in which case I'm not interested.


In Christ -

Papias

 

[essentialsaltes]

What would be more valuable within human learning, than science, in your opinion?

Potentially, the humanities, arts, & social sciences.

 

[DogmaHunter]

"Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints."

Agree or disagree?

Don't know if I should agree or not.

Are you asking if I agree with the content of the quote?
Or are you asking if I agree if that is what the word "scientism" means?

If the first, my answer is "no".
If the latter, my answer is "I don't really care".

I view science as a very usefull tool to find out how reality works.
The best tool that I know of. Are there better tools out there? Perhaps, who knows... not me in any case. So until someone provides me with a better tool, I have no choice but to stick with the best one I'm aware of.

 

[DogmaHunter]

What's improper about the question?

There are implications and assumptions burried in your question which are implicitly accepted when even only trying to answer your question one way or the other.

It is what people call a "loaded question". No matter what the answer is, the answer will silently have to accept the implications and assumptions.

So if one doesn't wish to agree to these implications and assumptions, one would have to take a step back and call the question itself into question.

Which is the point where you start your little game of screaming "evasion!!!" instead of actually addressing the valid objections to your loaded question.

This is an extremely dishonest practice and you should change your ways. It has become a default routine for you and it's really not pretty. Or nice.

The only thing that's improper is your repeated evasion concerning the questions.

Here we go again........

I swear I didn't even read that sentence while I was writing the above. That's how predictable you have become.

 

[DerelictJunction]

So, you would disagree that a"empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning"? What would be more valuable within human learning, in your opinion?

Fastest burden shift on record!

 

[AV1611VET]

"Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints."

Agree or disagree?

Agree.

In my opinion, the Tribulation period will consist of Christianity vs. Scientism, with emphasis on evolution.

QV also: 94

 

[DerelictJunction]

"Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints."

Agree or disagree?

Disagree. From Scientism | Define Scientism at Dictionary.com

Scientism: noun
1. the style, assumptions, techniques, practices, etc., typifying or regarded as typifying scientists.
2. the belief that the assumptions, methods of research, etc., of the physical and biological sciences are equally appropriate and essential to all other disciplines, including the humanities and the social sciences.
3. scientific or pseudoscientific language.

Looks like the dictionary doesn't agree with your definition either.

 

[AV1611VET]

Looks like the dictionary doesn't agree with your definition either.

Then it disagrees with Wikipedia.

QV the first sentence here: Scientism.