Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
2,947
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 16:
Line 16: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Debunking Scientism
Worshipers of Scientism also believe that science should replace traditional [[morality]], so that they can do whatever they want as long as it is dictated by "science".<ref>http://www.crosswalk.com/news/exposing-the-religion-of-scientism-11598780.html</ref>
Worshipers of Scientism also believe that science should replace traditional [[morality]], so that they can do whatever they want as long as it is dictated by "science".<ref>http://www.crosswalk.com/news/exposing-the-religion-of-scientism-11598780.html</ref>
[[faith]], [[reason]], and science itself.<ref name="Magician"/>
== Debunking Scientism ==
Scientism is in essence a [[gnostic]] culture applied onto realms of science hence scientism can be often debunked by pointing to the gnostic traits.
=== Vagueness and word-spinning ===
Gnostic works are marked by [[psychological manipulation|manipulative]] vagueness, word-spinning and tedium, so is scientism. For example, the textbook legend of [[James Hutton|Hutton]] and [[Charles Lyell|Lyell]], partisans of scientism, has been declared to be dim and confused compared with that of [[Copernicus]] and [[Galileo]].<ref name="GOULDinNYT">{{cite web |title=IT'S AN OLD, OLD , OLD, OLD WORLD |publisher= NYT |author=D. R. Wallace |date= June 14, 1987 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/11/09/home/gould-arrow.html |accessdate=7 June 2015 |quote=Hutton's theory of the earth ... was not based on field observations but on his wishful, speculative confusion of geological process with Newtonian physics....Hutton and Lyell were dedicated not to modern notions of geological dynamism but to antique ones of geological steady-state...The textbook legend of Hutton and Lyell seems dim and confused compared with that of Copernicus and Galileo.}}</ref> Another proponent of scientism, [[Darwin]], wrote books in a way that they were compared to a Victorian curiosity shop where the main message was somewhat lost in the clutter.<ref name="Larson">{{cite book
|author=E.J. Larson
|title=Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory
|publisher=Modern Library
|location=New York
|year=2006
|pages=96
|isbn=0-8129-6849-2
|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=xzLRvxlJhzkC}}</ref> A blatant example of word spinning can be found in the text describing the research interests of [[Alan Guth]], the 1981 author of so called [[Cosmic inflation|inflation theory]]<ref name="Guth">{{cite web|title=Faculty Directory: Alan Guth, Victor F. Weisskopf Professor of Physics|publisher=Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Physics|accessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://web.mit.edu/physics/people/faculty/guth_alan.html|quote=}}</ref>:
<blockquote>"Working with Prof. Edward Farhi and others, Guth has explored the question of whether it is in principle possible to ignite inflation in a hypothetical laboratory, thereby creating a new universe. The answer is a definite maybe. They showed that it cannot be done classically, but with quantum tunneling it might be theoretically possible. The new universe, if it can be created, would not endanger our own universe. Instead it would slip through a wormhole and rapidly disconnect completely."</blockquote>
Analysis of contradictions in the text:
* Ad. ''"the question of whether it is in principle possible to ignite inflation in a hypothetical laboratory, thereby creating a new universe."'' In hypothetical laboratory, anything is possible, because it rests solely on the imagination of the author of the idea and his bare assertion. Unlike science, scientism is based on ''just-so stories'' and ''bare assertion fallacy'' (also known as ''proof by assertion'') and tries to shake off the [[burden of proof]] for its claims.
* If somebody something shows (''"They showed that"''), then the terms like ''"it might be theoretically possible"'' and conditional sentence ''"if it can be"'' become surplus. On the other hand, if it is not sure ''"if it can be"'' or not, then the expression ''"They showed"'' is clearly a [[lie]].
* Ad. ''"The answer is a definite maybe."'' In fact, ''"a definite maybe"'' is not answer at all, it leaves question undecided, in the same status as before asking.
== Reference ==
== Reference ==
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}