Argument I don't understand
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-10-2014, 02:51 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 02:38 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 02:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  Scientism is an extreme position that says only science has value. Show me how that is a rampant attitude among scientists.

Your argument is a straw man.

"Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that physical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints." - Those viewpoints would include metaphysics/supernatural events.

Let me rephrase my query (a sincere one, again). Are all atheists taking the scientism worldview? Are most? Do you? Why or why not?

No, it is an extreme position that hardly anyone takes.

Drop this stupid straw man argument.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-10-2014, 03:35 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 02:38 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 02:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  Scientism is an extreme position that says only science has value. Show me how that is a rampant attitude among scientists.

Your argument is a straw man.

"Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that physical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints." - Those viewpoints would include metaphysics/supernatural events.

Ah, so it's a thing you made up.

That you've put that in quotation marks implies you've taken it from elsewhere. Did you?

More to the point, can you find even a single example of someone defining and professing such a sentiment for themselves?

(16-10-2014 02:38 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Let me rephrase my query (a sincere one, again). Are all atheists taking the scientism worldview? Are most? Do you? Why or why not?

If you're going somewhere with this, please go there faster.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
16-10-2014, 03:55 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 03:35 PM)cjlr Wrote:  More to the point, can you find even a single example of someone defining and professing such a sentiment for themselves?

Actually, yes: Alex Rosenberg, The Atheist's Guide to Reality. He basically says "Yes, I'm guilty of scientism [pretty much as defined by Mr. Q], and proud of it." I have a hard time taking him seriously, though, and I'm even tempted to call "poe" -- like this is a deliberate attempt by a non-atheist to make us all seem unreasonable. But the book is out there.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Atheists-Guide...0393080234
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-10-2014, 04:10 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 03:55 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 03:35 PM)cjlr Wrote:  More to the point, can you find even a single example of someone defining and professing such a sentiment for themselves?

Actually, yes: Alex Rosenberg, The Atheist's Guide to Reality. He basically says "Yes, I'm guilty of scientism [pretty much as defined by Mr. Q], and proud of it." I have a hard time taking him seriously, though, and I'm even tempted to call "poe" -- like this is a deliberate attempt by a non-atheist to make us all seem unreasonable. But the book is out there.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Atheists-Guide...0393080234

Certainly it's possible to find single examples of anything you can imagine and then some.
(but do note that it was you who supplied one and not a certain other participant in this, ah, conversation)

I then say "so what?"

"Scientism" is a word I, as a scientist, have never encountered outside disingenuous apologetics. So there's that.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-10-2014, 04:12 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 03:55 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 03:35 PM)cjlr Wrote:  More to the point, can you find even a single example of someone defining and professing such a sentiment for themselves?

Actually, yes: Alex Rosenberg, The Atheist's Guide to Reality. He basically says "Yes, I'm guilty of scientism [pretty much as defined by Mr. Q], and proud of it." I have a hard time taking him seriously, though, and I'm even tempted to call "poe" -- like this is a deliberate attempt by a non-atheist to make us all seem unreasonable. But the book is out there.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Atheists-Guide...0393080234

OK, great. Now we have one philosopher and zero scientists. Rampant? Widespread? Common? Pervasive in the sciences?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-10-2014, 04:27 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 04:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 03:55 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Actually, yes: Alex Rosenberg, The Atheist's Guide to Reality. He basically says "Yes, I'm guilty of scientism [pretty much as defined by Mr. Q], and proud of it." I have a hard time taking him seriously, though, and I'm even tempted to call "poe" -- like this is a deliberate attempt by a non-atheist to make us all seem unreasonable. But the book is out there.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Atheists-Guide...0393080234

Certainly it's possible to find single examples of anything you can imagine and then some.
(but do note that it was you who supplied one and not a certain other participant in this, ah, conversation)

I then say "so what?"

"Scientism" is a word I, as a scientist, have never encountered outside disingenuous apologetics. So there's that.

To be fair, you did only ask for a single example. But as Chas pointed out, this fellow is a philosopher rather than a scientist. I don't know of any actual scientists who hold such an extreme view. I occasionally do get the feeling that there is an attitude of "If science can't answer the question, it's not a meaningful question" -- and that may be more what Mr. Q is getting at. Scientists tend not to have much use for speculative metaphysics. But I don't see that as damning. Musicians don't have much use for quantum mechanics either, and nobody complains about that. It simply isn't germane to what they're doing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 06:07 AM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 02:38 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  "Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that physical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints." - Those viewpoints would include metaphysics/supernatural events.

Let me rephrase my query (a sincere one, again). Are all atheists taking the scientism worldview? Are most? Do you? Why or why not?

I believe that it is useful to be able to make reliable predictions about things, so we can make better informed decisions. The only way you can get to reliable predictions is through honest observation that doesn't involve trying to shoehorn some previously held notion into the results.

I believe that there are an infinite number of things out there that can be posited to be true, but that cannot be proven one way or the other. This does not mean that any of them should be given any serious consideration if lacking evidence. Why should we seriously consider leprechauns and not unicorns, if they both have the same amount of evidence (none)?

I believe that, yes, it is possible to take an approach of solipsism when discussing material things, and that it's utterly irrelevant. Sure, I can't prove to you that we're not in the Matrix right now, but see my above point. There are an infinite number of possibilities that I can't waste my time considering if they don't have any evidence. Whether or not I'm in the Matrix, our reality has certain predictable qualities that can be studied, observed, and acted upon. Matrix or not, we have space stations, modern medicine, and the Internet, all gained through observation. I'm not going to step out in front of a car because "maybe it's the Matrix and maybe I can stop it with my mind".

So, you can interpret that how you want into the way you phrased your question. I hope this clears things up.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
17-10-2014, 06:33 PM
RE: Argument I don't understand
Another one those "I don't know therefore God" arguments. Not really convincing argument. Actually its really lazy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 11:16 AM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(16-10-2014 04:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 03:55 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Actually, yes: Alex Rosenberg, The Atheist's Guide to Reality. He basically says "Yes, I'm guilty of scientism [pretty much as defined by Mr. Q], and proud of it." I have a hard time taking him seriously, though, and I'm even tempted to call "poe" -- like this is a deliberate attempt by a non-atheist to make us all seem unreasonable. But the book is out there.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Atheists-Guide...0393080234

Certainly it's possible to find single examples of anything you can imagine and then some.
(but do note that it was you who supplied one and not a certain other participant in this, ah, conversation)

I then say "so what?"

"Scientism" is a word I, as a scientist, have never encountered outside disingenuous apologetics. So there's that.

I see, and that is very informative and helpful to me. What forms of knowledge do you all accept as valid other than what is scientifically researched? I asked because I noticed Chas and others were very quick to both insist that I provide peer-reviewed evidence for anything metaphysical and very quick to discount anecdotal evidence, no matter how abundant.

Thanks.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2014, 11:28 AM
RE: Argument I don't understand
(20-10-2014 11:16 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 04:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Certainly it's possible to find single examples of anything you can imagine and then some.
(but do note that it was you who supplied one and not a certain other participant in this, ah, conversation)

I then say "so what?"

"Scientism" is a word I, as a scientist, have never encountered outside disingenuous apologetics. So there's that.

I see, and that is very informative and helpful to me. What forms of knowledge do you all accept as valid other than what is scientifically researched? I asked because I noticed Chas and others were very quick to both insist that I provide peer-reviewed evidence for anything metaphysical and very quick to discount anecdotal evidence, no matter how abundant.

Thanks.

I think I see your problem.

Anecdotal "evidence" is not evidence.

So there's that.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: