[MD] Scientism

[Ian Glendinning]

Mark, Steve,

If your view of science is 100% the skeptical / falsifiable kind then
morality is no place for science. An alternative expression of the same
thing is that IF science wants to have something to say about morality, then
it (science) needs to adopt a more constructive view of life.

(ie I'm with Steve on pragmatic anti-skepticism)

The sad thing is that most science claims to be scientific - in the
emprically falsifiable kinda way - whereas in practice most scientific
theory and scientists are far from scientific. Neurotic.

Ian

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:15 AM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Steven Peterson
> <peterson.steve at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > >> Steve:
> > >
> > > I'm promoting pragmatic anti-skepticism. I'm saying that we not not be
> > >> any more skeptical about moral truth than we are about scientific
> > >> truth. Anyone objecting to moral truth as not resting on firm
> > >> foundations similar to those of scientific claims can be shown that
> > >> moral claims in fact do not suffer by comparison to scientific ones in
> > >> terms of epistemic grounding. All the criticisms typically made for
> > >> the possibility of moral knowledge can be shown to apply equally to
> > >> scientific knowledge that we are not skeptical about.
> > >>
> >
> > Mark:
> > >  Hi Steve,
> > > In my experience, science is based on skepticism, asking questions,
> > trying
> > > to disprove.  It is important to be skeptical about scientific truths
> > else
> > > wise we do not advance.  The practical applications of scientific
> methods
> > > are meant to uncover truth, not define it.  I would go so far as to say
> > that
> > > science presents a false notion of truth.
> >
> > Steve:
> > I think this notion is better put as falliblism which does not make us
> > skeptics doubting the possiblity of knowledge or that we now know
> > anything. It just means that we always keep in mind that we could be
> > wrong about any of our beliefs in particular and are willing to be
> > proven wrong by new evidence and arguments.
> >
> >
> > Mark
> > > The foundations of science are not necessarily firm, they are accepted.
> >  If
> > > we are not skeptical about scientific knowledge it is due to the
> profound
> > > indoctrination and resulting faith in its dogma.  Such a thing is
> termed
> > > Scientism.  This is not railing against science per se, it is a
> judgement
> > > against its applications to areas where it does not belong.
> >
> > Steve:
> > What are the areas where science does not belong in your view?
> >
>
> Mark:  Morality
>
> >
> > Best,
> > Steve
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>