• @Haagel
    link
    English
    4
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    You know what I mean, brother. There’s a huge scope of difference between applied sciences and natural philosophy. Our technological advancements fail to resolve fundamental questions about the human condition. Scientists rarely study epistemology or philosophy in order to attain our degrees and I think it shows in the public trend toward scientism.

      • @Haagel
        link
        English
        28 months ago

        Interesting read. I’m familiar with the Arthur C Clarke quote…

      • @fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Lol, I love when the woo community can’t argue in good faith, so have to artificially drag science to their level by calling it “scientism”.

        Magic isn’t real because you can’t prove it’s real, and science isn’t opposed to magic, because magic isn’t on the playing board.

        • Grail (capitalised)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          08 months ago

          I’m a degree-holding job-working scientist and I love science. I also love magic. Magic can be proven. Scientists have published hundreds of papers on the powerful placebo effect, also known as magic. Don’t tell me you’re going to deny the existence of the placebo effect?

        • @Haagel
          link
          English
          07 months ago

          Scientism is the dogmatic belief that empirical science is the only source of knowledge. It’s not arguing in bad faith to say that this is a dangerously flawed ideology.

          The inconvenient truth about scientific research is that 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘢 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧-𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵. Information requires a metaphysical framework in order to be interpreted in way that makes sense.

          Lacking a philosophical foundation, scientism produces dangerous results, like when Hitler and his ilk explicitly referred to Darwinism as their justification for the Holocaust.