Pure Science itself isn’t inherently an ideology. It a method of examining claims through empirical investigation and then drawing conclusion that have predictive value. It uses the framework of mathematics and statistics to analyze the evidence thereby opening up further avenues of investigation to test deeper claims. In this regard it has been very successful.
Having said that though Paul Feyerabend has a point when the practitioners of science become dogmatic and political in their outlook to the point that they transform the practice of science into a milieu dominated by groupthink, the willful neglect of contrary evidence and the elevation of the power dynamic of credentialism.
This invariably results in stagnant thinking, the formation of a closed secretarian priesthood/authority and the sacrifice of the rigorous scientific methodology to preordained conclusions.
The further venture of science into realms which are less quantifiable or indeed falsifiable (eg. morality and metaphysics) further challenges the scope of science’s applicability. A realism that seems lost to those who with each passing moment are intent in transforming science into the ideology of scientism.
No comments:
Post a Comment