Merged Is Scientism Really Justified?

[Gubiosak]

Is scientism really justified?

By scientism, I mean the idea that science is the only reliable way to gain knowledge about reality.

I am not convinced that this claim is correct.

But I don't want to attack a straw man.

So I would like to ask:

What is the strongest argument for scientism?

And how can we justify the claim that science is the only reliable source of knowledge?

 

[Andy_Ross]

What other ways are there that you think should be considered?

 

[Steve]

"Scientism"? "Scientism!"?! You funny, dude.

"Attack"? You farkin hilarious, dude.

Maybe you could describe, in detail, a viable alternative to the scientific method.

We will wait.

 

[Gubiosak]

What other ways are there that you think should be considered?

We should also consider logic, mathematics, and philosophy.Is science the only way to gain knowledge?

 

[Gubiosak]

"Scientism"? "Scientism!"?! You funny, dude.

"Attack"? You farkin hilarious, dude.

Maybe you could describe, in detail, a viable alternative to the scientific method.

We will wait.

I am not attacking the scientific method.
I am questioning the claim that science is the only way to gain knowledge.
Those are two different claims.

 

[Steve]

We should also consider logic, mathematics, and philosophy.Is science the only way to gain knowledge?

Logic = scientific method.

Mathematics = scientific method.

Philosophy - for some narrow ideas of knowledge..

I am not attacking the scientific method.
I am questioning the claim that science is the only way to gain knowledge.
Those are two different claims.

You used the word attack in your op.

 

[junkshop]

...So I would like to ask:

What is the strongest argument for scientism?

Your being able to post that question from whatever device you are using to this website in a language you don't speak seems to be a pretty good example.

 

[Gubiosak]

Logic = scientific method.

Mathematics = scientific method.

Philosophy - for some narrow ideas of knowledge..

You used the word attack in your op.

By "attack" I mean criticize an argument, not reject science or the scientific method.

 

[Gubiosak]

Your being able to post that question from whatever device you are using to this website in a language you don't speak seems to be a pretty good example.

I agree that science and technology are extremely valuable. My question is not about their usefulness, but about whether science is the only possible way to gain knowledge.

 

[junkshop]

I agree that science and technology are extremely valuable. My question is not about their usefulness, but about whether science is the only possible way to gain knowledge.

Then you need to specify what you mean by 'knowledge'.

 

[Gubiosak]

Then you need to specify what you mean by 'knowledge'.

I mean knowledge in a broad sense, including science, logic, mathematics, and philosophy. My question is whether science is the only path to knowledge.

 

[Steve]

I mean knowledge in a broad sense, including science, logic, mathematics, and philosophy. My question is whether science is the only path to knowledge.

Ideas have a role to play in a very broad sense - see hypothesis. Ideas only become practical knowledge when they are tested and confirmed using the scientific method.

You may have encountered people of various religious persuasions who "know" that their particular god exists. That, and similar ideas and philosophies, are not knowledge in any practical sense.

 

[Norman Alexander]

Human knowledge has been around since the first caveman learned that, although fire is burny, he could use it to see at night and cook his dinosaur steak.

Many religious proscriptions are actually passed-down history and knowledge, usually local to the time and place. They arose because someone learned something through observation and recording, proto-science.

So what's the alternative to this?

 

[ahhell]

The word scientism has its use, there some folks who use the.....sounds of science as though its a sort of magic incantation that can turn nonsense into sense.

That being said, the scientific method is the most reliable way to gain knowledge of reality. That belief is not what I would use scientism to describe. Google says I'm wrong about that though. I'm willing to hear about the alternatives, historically they don't have a good track record though.

 

[Steve]

The word scientism has its use, there some folks who use the.....sounds of science as though its a sort of magic incantation that can turn nonsense into sense.

That being said, the scientific method is the most reliable way to gain knowledge of reality. That belief is not what I would use scientism to describe. Google says I'm wrong about that though. I'm willing to hear about the alternatives, historically they don't have a good track record though.

I think the word scientism is used primarily to get a rise out of people. If the goal is to engage in serious discussion re alternatives to the scientific method then that is the term that would be used.

Human knowledge has been around since the first caveman learned that, although fire is burny, he could use it to see at night and cook his
dinosaur steak.
Many religious proscriptions are actually passed-down history and knowledge, usually local to the time and place. They arose because someone learned something through observation and recording, proto-science.

So what's the alternative to this?

Oops
!

 

[Norman Alexander]

I think the word scientism is used primarily to get a rise out of people. If the goal is to engage in serious discussion re alternatives to the scientific method then that is the term that would be used.

Oops !

Turkeys are, technically, descended from dinosaurs. Also shut up!

 

[junkshop]

I mean knowledge in a broad sense, including science, logic, mathematics, and philosophy. My question is whether science is the only path to knowledge.

No, those are subject areas, you need to specify what you mean by knowledge, until then your question is unanswerable.

 

[arthwollipot]

I mean knowledge in a broad sense, including science, logic, mathematics, and philosophy. My question is whether science is the only path to knowledge.

You seem to have already answered it yourself.

 

[Trebuchet]

I think the word scientism is used primarily to get a rise out of people. If the goal is to engage in serious discussion re alternatives to the scientific method then that is the term that would be used.

Oops
!

It's a made-up word which clearly gives away the OP's religious motivation. In his view, blind faith trumps science every day and an infinite number of times on Sunday.

 

[theprestige]

What is the strongest argument for scientism?

It makes specific, testable claims, with measurable, repeatable results. No other epistemological comes even remotely close enough to qualify.

And how can we justify the claim that science is the only reliable source of knowledge?

It's the only one that we know of so far. If you discover another source, let us know. If it turns out to be better at making testable claims with repeatable results, we'll probably switch.