The Rise of Scientific Fundamentalism

[donnay]

The Rise of Scientific Fundamentalism

By: Larry Malerba, DO



Contrary to the beliefs of some, science is not an impenetrable body of settled fact that must be defended at all costs in the name of truth. When science becomes a worldview—a philosophy of life, a metaphysical framework that explains existence—it is no longer science; it is scientism.

Anti-Holistic Conspiracy or Reality?

Contrary to the beliefs of some, science is not an impenetrable body of settled fact that must be defended at all costs in the name of truth. It is not a means by which to determine truth or to achieve absolute certainty. Neither is science a worldview. When science becomes a worldview—a philosophy of life, a metaphysical framework that explains existence—it is no longer science; it is scientism.

A series of recent events have something peculiar in common. There was a call for Dr Oz to be removed from his academic post at Columbia University. Measles hype triggered a spate of legislative efforts across the country designed to restrict freedom of vaccine choice. The FDA decided to conduct a regulatory review of the status of homeopathic medicines. And most recently, a rather odd series of articles appeared in the press downplaying the significance of Chipotle's move towards a GMO-free (genetically-modified organisms) menu.

The common thread is that these events were fueled by extremist elements within the scientific world whose intent is to control the narrative of what is and what is not considered to be acceptable or "real" science. These fundamentalist and corporate agitators, who act ostensibly in the name of science, can be likened to religious zealots who seek to impose their version of sacred scientific dogma upon the general public while at the same time prohibiting what they believe to be new heretical ideas from receiving a fair hearing.

Continued...

[osan]

You need to read The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, from the 19th to the 21st Century

[Zippyjuan]

Science: Extremists. Religious Zealots. Sacred Dogma.

[Sola_Fide]

Thomas Kuhn: The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions

[presence]

[Mach]

[luctor-et-emergo]

I think this simple image says it all.

Apart from that, I was taught that as a scientist your highest goal is to prove that your theory is WRONG. Not that your theory is right. People forget this as soon as the results of scientific research influences politics.

[Mach]

But it's their theory and humans always end up with the same goal.... SELF.

http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-.../dp/0374533555

[PaulConventionWV]

I think this simple image says it all.

Apart from that, I was taught that as a scientist your highest goal is to prove that your theory is WRONG. Not that your theory is right. People forget this as soon as the results of scientific research influences politics.

Yeah, I don't like that talking point because it poses science as some sort of selfless charitable venture in which everyone involved would sacrifice their lives for the truth in spite of their own interests. It's really just a talking point for the people who believe in that kind of thing, that science is some kind of fountain of truth in which no dogma can ever survive. Any system, no matter its intention, will be corrupted whether we realize it or not. The "every scientist tries to prove themselves wrong" line is really just a talking point of people who want us to trust in the authority of the scientific establishment and the talking heads who supposedly represent that mindset.

The veracity of scientists is really no more special than any other profession, so it's a bit harmful to attach this selfless altruistic mindset to science while casting a watchful eye toward every other profession and questioning everything that comes from their midst.