The Platonism of scientism
- thrasymachus
- Posts: 520
- Joined: March 7th, 2020, 11:21 am
The Platonism of scientism
This "faith" in the scientist's world carrying over into absolute independent conditions (though not complete, of course; no scientist thinks true foundational accounts have been realized. But what HAS been realized, is a part, an approximation of what is truly there) is nothing short of the old Platonic position that things witnessed in the world actually have, in some measure, the properties "given" to them in the observational act.
So when there is talk about the validity of science in discussions about the nature of the real and our relation to real things, what is presumed is Platonistic beliefs about the what is really there: the assumption that a witnessed object is a partial and qualified representation of what is being witnessed, and when we think about it, our thinking, in this limited way. grasps actuality as it really is, independent of the perceptual faculties in play.
No avoiding it: the subsuming of philosophical issues under science and its paradigms is simply a modern form of Platonism.
-
- Posts: 137
- Joined: April 10th, 2022, 4:44 pm
Re: The Platonism of scientism
thrasymachus wrote: ↑July 20th, 2022, 11:44 am Scientism is the attempt to make science into a philosophy, that is, make the scientist's vocabulary into one that also speaks to foundational issues regarding the nature of material substance, objects in the world and the cognitive relations we have with them, conceptual frameworks into which foundational talk fits, and so on. The trouble with this kind of thinking, very popular among posters and those who like the both puzzles and the clarity of scientific thinking, is that it is reducible to Platonism, which says the objects which we stand among in the world are, in their apprehension, absolutely "there" as objects to the extent that their apprehension acknowledges in them some "share" of the original and eternal idea of what they are. So when you observe a tree, the tree taken as a tree, in all of the conceptual apparatus science confers upon it-- the gravity that resists the upward flow of fluids, the chlorophyllous description of internal chemical processes, etc. as somehow being "there" in a solid objective way that continues to be "there" even when no one is looking, that is, even when no perceptual, cognitive apparatus is brought to bear upon "it". So when observers remove themselves from the geological dig or the laboratory's microscopes, all they witnessed when actually "there," continues to hold, as if the, say, genetic material in the petri dish still remained genetic material when the lights went out and the doors were closed to an empty room.
This "faith" in the scientist's world carrying over into absolute independent conditions (though not complete, of course; no scientist thinks true foundational accounts have been realized. But what HAS been realized, is a part, an approximation of what is truly there) is nothing short of the old Platonic position that things witnessed in the world actually have, in some measure, the properties "given" to them in the observational act.
So when there is talk about the validity of science in discussions about the nature of the real and our relation to real things, what is presumed is Platonistic beliefs about the what is really there: the assumption that a witnessed object is a partial and qualified representation of what is being witnessed, and when we think about it, our thinking, in this limited way. grasps actuality as it really is, independent of the perceptual faculties in play.
No avoiding it: the subsuming of philosophical issues under science and its paradigms is simply a modern form of Platonism.
Agree. This used to be called metaphysical realism. Some philosophers don't like the term but it seems to be true for those claiming the world exists as it is without needing to be perceived or described.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: The Platonism of scientism
I have always thought that sciencism — I call it that because someone who practises 'scientism' is surely a 'scientist', and that term already has a widely-known use! — is the misapplication of science. I.e. applying science outside the area in which it is relevant, correct and 'competent'.thrasymachus wrote: ↑July 20th, 2022, 11:44 am Scientism is the attempt to make science into a philosophy, that is, make the scientist's vocabulary into one that also speaks to foundational issues regarding the nature of material substance, objects in the world and the cognitive relations we have with them, conceptual frameworks into which foundational talk fits, and so on.
One example of such a misapplication is asking science to rule on the existence of God. [There are many other examples too; this one is not special or specifically relevant here.] Science cannot deal with questions for which there is no evidence. That isn't a shortcoming of science, but only a characteristic of science. Nevertheless, for questions like these, we turn to philosophy and metaphysics, not to science, which is not equipped to deal with such matters.
As for Platonism, I wouldn't know.
"Who cares, wins"
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: The Platonism of scientism
I.e. applying science outside the area in which it is relevant, capable and 'competent'.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑July 21st, 2022, 12:21 pm I.e. applying science outside the area in which it is relevant, correct and 'competent'.
There, that's a better choice of word, I think.
"Who cares, wins"
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Platonism of scientism
Speculations about the value of cholesterol, and fat in the diet has been generated by pretty poor meta-analyses of epidemiological data collated with some very dubious means to formulate dietary guidelines which have, through the recommendation of a low fat high carb diet, emphasising vegetable oils over animal fat led to a serious epidemic of obesity, type2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome and heart disease.
All the old recommendations are being gradually overturned and a return to saturated fat and ending restrictions on dietary cholesterol are all too slowly returning.
- Tom Butler
- Posts: 107
- Joined: February 23rd, 2017, 10:24 pm
Re: The Platonism of scientism
Interesting point of view. In my studies, I have learned to think of scientism as a person's assumption that "if science does not specifically account for something, that something cannot be ... and is therefore impossible." It is a belief in the supremacy of science to explain the world. I would not characterize scientism as a philosophy. It is more religious belief than scholarly observation.thrasymachus wrote: ↑July 20th, 2022, 11:44 am Scientism is the attempt to make science into a philosophy, ...
The usual companion concept is "pseudoscience." In scientism, a person who studies that which is not supported by (mainstream) science is promoting false science. Here is a list of pseudoscience maintained by the cadre of skeptical Wikipedia Editors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... udoscience
I think in the final analysis, scientism is a form of obstructionisms seeking to maintain the status quo.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023