At what cost do we confuse scientism with science?
I started writing the following in response to someone who seemed, like many of my generation, to have swapped the idea of belief for the idea that we can be more certain if we just stick to science.
A simple idea, but one that doesn't work. Science and worldview are both needed, and remain, as always, partners in motivating us.
We all, according to our Psyches, have a faith system of some sort to help us decide how to put the pieces together on any given day . .
As a thoroughly practical and quite effective earth use scientist , I agree entirely that we all must allow scientific evaluation to reform our beliefs ,,,,,,and not the other way around.
That settled, there is a still a major problem with modern western cultures. They are run, not by scientists, but by people who worship some simple ideas about science; They make claims about " science" being able totally frame the world we live in and have to make decisions in.
Maybe all this order is all science, but let me assert, we don't know the half of it and according to the psyches, we need a world view to manage the big chunk of what we don't know.
Subtle a distinction, i know but, it we don't do science properly and respect the limits of the scientific method eg testing as Whitehead predicted quite rightly, we get things really wrong. Our leaders are increasingly choosing to do things that don't work and that means their "science" has not fully connected the dots.
His intellectual companion Ellul ( The Technological Society) said. "What doesn't work in a technological society gets thrown out ". The panic we see all around shows us the speed of the stupid tram many are on Todays technological fix, becomes tomorrows rubbish. We are wearing it.
BACK TO A FOUNDATION?
I can't say I fully understand where the boundary is BUT
Belief, to my mind, is always an essential thing to enable us to frame the things we do know from the things we don't and then get on with life.
Epistemology is fine, but it has its limits in motivating us because there are so many loose ends IMO to any worldview. ( which is another word for belief )
If we waited for science to tell us how to live, would we be dead before we lived ?
Another idea
I totally reject this modern idea that belief is something only unthinking people do/have and the contrary oversimplification that anyone actually lives ONLY on what they can rationalize ( some call that belief or worldview "scientism").
Our poor children's inertia is partly explained by such simplistic assumptions and chatter.
If you really believe that only by rationalizing things you act, you ignore the problem / delays in development for children who have no way of really properly testing (essential
ingredient in sound science) what works.
There is a strong case that this new faith in scientism has caused a lot of retardation of learning in the West . None of us can test everything in one lifetime ?
I think we all have a degree of close mindedness, but that only highlights the needed role of belief in our lives.
Belief is not wrong but essential to motivate us. Belief in either the goodness of God, the mechanistic nature of all that is, the right of the strong to dominate the weak, and others like" we must not offend other's egos by disagreeing with them", determines how we live out our days and teach or not teach our children.
More tommorrow .
I was so pleased to hear the leader of the Sky News service today remind the audience that the events of the day in Australia (particularly the Muslim Payman's resignation from the Labor party ) remind Australians that we don't and never have believed in religious political parties and that the separation of Church from State goes back to Jesus's time. Even Christ;s followers ( say around the time of the Cromwell's )have had to be reminded of that.
ReplyDeleteOur secular heritage, which is accepted as a sound base for civil education and Statecraft , is because we believe ( or used to believe ) that all men are equal and all men are free to choose whomever they like to lead them. We are talking here of the historic framing of the Christian faith as it is summarized in Romans 12 and 13.
Below is how my AI on the computer reworked my material . No problem . Which is more punchy, do you think? . I have to say AI can make things a little more clear by filling in some missing paragraphs.
ReplyDelete" It’s fascinating to explore the intersection of religion, politics, and secularism. Senator Fatima Payman’s recent resignation from the Australian Labor Party has certainly sparked discussions on these topics. Let me provide some context:
Senator Fatima Payman, a first-term Labor senator from Western Australia, recently resigned from the Labor Party. Her decision came after she crossed the floor to vote for a Greens motion calling for the recognition of Palestine as a state. This move made her the first ALP member to do so in 18 years1. Payman cited her conscience as the driving force behind her decision, expressing deep concern about the ongoing situation in Gaza and the need for recognition of Palestinian statehood2.
Now, let’s delve into the broader themes you’ve raised. The separation of Church and State has been a fundamental principle in many democratic societies. It aims to prevent religious institutions from directly influencing political decisions and vice versa. While Australia doesn’t have an official state religion, its secular heritage is deeply rooted in historical and philosophical contexts.
The idea that all individuals are equal and free to choose their leaders aligns with democratic principles. In the context of Christianity, passages like Romans 12 and 13 have been interpreted in various ways. Romans 13, for instance, discusses submission to governing authorities, emphasizing the importance of obeying laws and respecting authority figures. However, interpretations can differ significantly, especially when considering historical events like the English Civil War (often associated with Cromwell) and the broader evolution of political thought.
In summary, Senator Payman’s resignation highlights the complexities of balancing personal convictions, party loyalty, and broader societal values. It’s a reminder that the interplay between religion, politics, and secularism continues to shape our world today"