Science or Scientism?! A Critical Study of Exclusive Scientism

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Hamid Reza Shakerin
Full Professor at “The logic of understanding religion Department” in Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought.
Abstract
Introduction: The rule of experimental science in stablishing the modern civilization and changes in human life is an object of multidimensional studies. It has brought about different approaches, one of them is scientism which has had noticeable effects on human culture and thought, especially on the western one. The mentioned approach has especial indications also in ontology, epistemology and methodology of knowledge, which invites the philosophers of science and religion to deep thinking on it. It is because of having important implications concerning religious studies and relations between religion and science, which is at least absolute governance of science on religion and religious understanding methods.
Method: The present issue is to study and identify the above approach and its reasons by descriptive method and evaluate it by rational-analytical one.
Results: The result is however, necessity of understanding the diference between science and scientism. Factually scientism is not based on a logical standpoint, nor will it have a useful function in the field of science and human knowledge.
Conclusion:

From the religiouse epistemologic point of view, thre is no important difference between the week scientism and the strong one. The latter, however, indicates that religious understanding and interpretation should be everchanged on the basis of what the modern scienc imposes.
Contemplation on scientism and its reasons indicates that:
Not the main idea is coherentive, nor is it based on the sound epistemic foundations.
The reasons of scientism are even affected by lack of logial consistency or failure to justify it.
Not only scientism has no beneficial rule in science, but also has a detrimental one.
Keywords
Scientism
Naturalism
Epistemological Naturalism
Methodological Naturalism

Subjects

  1. Barbour, Ian. (1990). Religion in an Age of Science. Vol 1,
  2. Bennett, M. R. and Hacker, M. S. (2003). Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience. London: Blackwell.
  3. Bunnin, Nicholas & Yu, Jiyuan (2009). The Blackwell dictionary of Western philosophy. Blackwell publishing, USA.
  4. Clarke, Steven (2009). Naturalism, Science and the Supernatural. Sophia, , vol. 48, no. 2, 132.
  5. Copleston, Frederic (1953). A History of Philosophy. Vol III, Ockham to Suarez, New Man Press.
  6. Davies, Paul (1995). Are We Alone? Philosophical Implications of The Discovery of Extraterrestrial Life. New York: Basic Books.
  7. Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Transworld Publishers, London: Bantam Press.
  8. Galparsoro, Ignacio, Jose, and Alberto Cordero (2013). Introduction: Naturalism and Philosophy. in Jose Ignacio Galparsoro, and Alberto Cordero (eds.), Reflections on Naturalism, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
  9. Haught, John (2006). Is Nature Enough? Meaning and Truth in the Age of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Jackson, Frank (1986). What Mary Didn’t Know. Journal of Philosophy, 83 (5), 291-295.
  11. Kekes, John (1980). The nature of philosophy. Totowa: Rowman & Littlefield.
  12. Krauss, Lawrence Maxwell (2012). A Universe from Nothing: Why there is something rather than nothing. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  13. McGrath, Alister E. and Joanna Collicutt McGrath (2007). The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine. The United States of America: Intervarsity Press.
  14. McGrath, Alister E. (2011). Why God Won’t Go Away: Engaging With The New Atheism. London: Spck.
  15. McMullin, Ernan (2011). Varieties of Methodological Naturalism. in: The Nature of Nature, Bruce L. Gordon and William A Dembski (eds.), ISI Books.
  16. McMullin, Ernan (2001). Plantinga’s Defense of Special In Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives, edited by Robert Penoock. London, England: A Bradford Book.
  17. Medawar, Peter B. (1985). The limits of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  18. Moreland, James Porter (2018). Scientism and secularism: Learning to respond to a dangerous ideology. Crossway.
  19. Nagel, Thomas (2012). Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False. United States: ‎Oxford University Press.
  20. Nagel, Thomas (1986). THE VIEW FROM NOWHERE. New York: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS.
  21. Naturalistic Epistemology. Internrt Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  22. Oppy, Graham (2013). The Best Argument Against God. Palgrave Pivot.
  23. Peacocke, Arthur (1993). Theology for a Scientific Age. Fortress: Minneapolis.
  24. Pigliucci, Massimo (2013). New Atheism and the Scientific Turn in the Atheism Movements. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 37 (1), September, 142-153.
  25. Ratzsch, Del. (2001). Nature, Design and Science: The Status of Design in Natural Science. New York: State University of New York Press.
  26. Ratzsch, Del. (1986). Science and its limits: The Natural Sciences in Christian Perspective. Christian Fellowship, USA.
  27. Scott, Eugenie (2010). Darwin Prosecuted: Review of Johnson's Darwin on Trial. Creation/ Evolution, 13 (2).
  28. Smith, R. Scott (2011). Naturalism and our Knowledge of Reality: Testing Religious Truth-Claims. Ashgate Publishing.
  29. Tye, Michael (2017). Qualia. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URLhttps://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/qalia/>.