No abstract

No abstract

Our Western society has been much shaped by scientific thought and discoveries. We not only depend practically on science in our ways of living. Our thinking and attitudes are also shaped by the theories and methods of science. The overwhelming intellectual and practical successes of science that lie behind this impact of science on our culture have led some people to think that there are no real limits to the competence of science, no limits to what can be achieved in the name of science. Or, if there are limits to the scientific enterprise, the idea is that science, at least, sets the boundaries for what we humans can ever achieve or know about reality. There is nothing outside the domain of science, nor is there any area of human life to which science cannot successfully be applied. This view (or similar views) has sometimes been called scientism. (It has also been labelled scientific naturalism or scientific materialism. I will, however, try to show why we should not attribute the same meaning to these three terms.)

No abstract

What is scientism and where and why does it differ from its rivals? The second aspect is crucial because, in assessing scientism, we also need to identify its rivals and the border areas between scientism and these rivals. If we reject one we need to know what alternatives there are and where there is overlap. This chapter offers answers to these questions and distinguishes between different types of scientism. It also suggests that liberal naturalism, humanism, social constructionism, religious naturalism, and theism are best understood as rivals to scientism, although that does not mean that they are on all accounts necessarily incompatible with scientism. It merely means that they contain elements that are in serious tension with the epistemology and ontology of scientism or its overall tendency to be deeply suspicious about everything in reality that cannot be described, understood, or explained by the natural sciences.