Quotessence
Home / Topics / Scientism Quotes

Scientism Quotes

Browse 177 quotes about Scientism.

Related topics

Scientism Quotes

“It’s time to blow scientism out of the water. It’s time for judging to replace perceiving. Every time a worshiper of scientism says, “Where is your sensory evidence?” (a perceiving requirement), they should be met with, “Where is your sufficient reason?” (a judging requirement). That will create cognitive dissonance in them. They will go into meltdown. Where is the sufficient reason that scientific matter exists? According to Big Bang theory, it did not exist prior to the Big Bang, and neither did space and time. In other words, we know that there was an epoch when all the stuff of perceiving – matter, space, time and the physical senses –did not exist. However, all of the stuff of judgment – mathematics – did exist. This is why judging is primary and perceiving secondary, rather than the other way around. Get with the program. Scientism is an entirely false worldview. That’s a fact. The sole thing it gets right is that uses mathematics, which is the true basis of reality.”

“Science has always been in conflict with narratives. Judged by the yardstick of science, the majority of them prove to be fables. But to the extent that science does not restrict itself to stating useful regularities and seeks truth, it is obliged to legitimate the rules of its own game.”

“Scientists think rationalists are mad because the rationalists are dancing to the Music of the Spheres, to which scientists are stone deaf. Scientists are like the blind describing the visible world to the sighted. The vast majority of reality is hidden from the human senses, yet scientists have chosen to consider the observable as the only reality, and everything else as unreal. In fact, the unobservable is true reality, and the observable is a sensory phenomenal, empirical delusion that actively masks non-sensory, noumenal, rational reality.”

“Consciousness is the greatest mystery of science. Scientists know that consciousness has something to do with the brain, but scientists do not know how this brain produces consciousness. Scientists call consciousness the “hard problem.” In spite of all this, progressively more individuals assert that knowledge about reality comes solely from science. It is a belief system in materialist science that is spreading across the world. Scientism does not realize it is, in reality, a religion. In brief, this new belief system is what is known as Scientism. Scientism is nothing less than a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It is the Demiurge masquerading as reasonable academic inquiry.”

“There is nothing more pleasant than rejecting hedonism, there is nothing more useful than rejecting utilitarianism, there is nothing more scientific than rejecting scientism, and there is nothing more prosocial than rejecting collectivism. In other words, there is no better way to enter into a healthy relationship with instrumental values than to reject doctrines that try to make them into intrinsic values.”

“As for karma itself, it is apparently only that which binds "jiva" (sentience, life, spirit, etc.) with "ajiva" (the lifeless, material aspect of this world) - perhaps not unlike that which science seeks to bind energy with mass (if I understand either concept correctly). But it is only through asceticism that one might shed his predestined karmic allotment. I suppose this is what I still don't quite understand in any of these shramanic philosophies, though - their end-game. Their "moksha", or "mukti", or "samsara". This oneness/emptiness, liberation/ transcendence of karma/ajiva, of rebirth and ego - of "the self", of life, of everything. How exactly would this state differ from any standard, scientific definition of death? Plain old death. Or, at most, if any experience remains, from what might be more commonly imagined/feared to be death - some dark perpetual existence of paralyzed, semi-conscious nothingness. An incessant dreamless sleep from which one never wakes? They all assure you, of course, that this will be no condition of endless torment, but rather one of "eternal bliss". Inexplicable, incommunicable "bliss", mind you, but "bliss" nonetheless. So many in the realm of science, too, seem to propagate a notion of "bliss" - only here, in this world, with the universe being some great amusement park of non-stop "wonder" and "discovery". Any truly scientific, unbiased examination of their "discoveries", though, only ever seems to reveal a world that simply just "is" - where "wonder" is merely a euphemism for ignorance, and learning is its own reward because, frankly, nothing else ever could be. Still, the scientist seeks to conquer this ignorance, even though his very happiness depends on it - offering only some pale vision of eternal dumbfoundedness, and endless hollow surprises. The shramana, on the other hand, offers total knowledge of this hollowness, all at once - renouncing any form of happiness or pleasure, here, to seek some other ultimate, unknowable "bliss", off in the beyond...”

“Part of the problem with Dawkins’s criticisms of Aquinas, then (and of the other New Atheists’ criticisms of certain other religious arguments), is that they fail to understand the difference between a scientific hypothesis and an attempted metaphysical demonstration, and illegitimately judge the latter as if it were the former. Of course, they might respond by claiming that scientific reasoning, and maybe mathematical reasoning too, are the only legitimate kinds, and seek thereby to rule out metaphysical arguments from the get go. But there are two problems with this view (which is known as “scientism” or “positivism”). First, if they want to take this position, they’ll need to defend it and not simply assert it; otherwise they’ll be begging the question against their opponents and indulging in just the sort of dogmatism they claim to oppose. Second, the moment they attempt to defend it, they will have effectively refuted it, for scientism or positivism is itself a metaphysical position that could only be justified using metaphysical arguments.”

“They failed to see that globalisation was merely a tactic to prise power from nation states towards international conglomerates. Once the power was siphoned from the people and democratic control was circumvented, the ability to assert global governance without any democratic restraint was available.”

“Now it seems that the nasty people are those who question the direction of our society, our loss of liberty, our submission to technology and domination of the security, industrial, military and pharmaceutical society (SIMP). We are living in the SIMP society and we are the Simpsons.”

“Everywhere one can see the supply of soap-opera and extension of that scripted discourse into the political domain. By devoting our attention to the mainstream systems that seem to be miraculously harmonising across national boundaries in a similar fashion without distinctiveness or variation, we give more power to the deadening mono-cultural potency of tech-collectivism.”

“We are giving power to people we do not know, for purposes we cannot prove, for exercise we cannot control while assuming they must be benign and beneficent without evidence and without scrutinising the circumstances of our blank cheque to them that we signed in the blood from relinquished control of our bodies. Giving the keys to the dungeon to these strangers in suits or jeans and white coats and expecting benevolence not evident in their belief system and rejected as irrelevant thereby, is the greatest common exercise in folly in human history.”

“When bondage is built with billions of key strokes the death of freedom bit by bit may not be so obvious. The masters hold the keys to chains or networks, to the links and sites fashioned into our consciousness. While we may browse, it is as a domesticated animal.”

“Without naming anyone if you think for a moment, you will realize that some of the most well-known names on the spiritual 'lecture circuit' are scientists, not spiritual masters. A Ph.D. after one's name is almost mandatory to be considered an expert in some New Age circles, and the initials M.D., are almost equivalent to a kind of contemporary spiritual priesthood.”

“Consistency of curiosity with which a historian, anthropologist, archaeologist and physicist works demands that one likewise gives attention to Qur’an with objectivity and sincerity. Qur’an is not a book of science. But, to present its basic message, it focuses our attention on different realities, both within our consciousness and in the outside natural phenomena. Modern science has not found any error in Qur’an’s descriptive statements about nature.”

“As a matter of fact, Islamic texts fourteen centuries back do not say that the earth was created a few thousand years ago. In fact, Qur’an mentions that at different places in the universe, the length of the day could be hugely different as compared to Earth. When Qur’an discusses the material world, its descriptions are found to be consistent with established facts of modern science. In 650 A.D., those things could not have been conceived, observed and communicated by a person who did not receive any formal scientific education.”

“When Qur’an focuses our attention to nature, some of its descriptive statements about the state of early universe (Fussilat: 11), movement of mountains and continents (An-Naml: 88), human development in a mother’s womb (Al-Mu’minun: 13-16), non- mingling nature of seas (Ar-Rahman: 19-20), rotation of planets, stars and celestial bodies (Az-Zumar: 5), expansion of the universe (Adh-Dhariat: 47), relative nature of time in the universe (As- Sajdah: 5), shining of moon by reflected sunlight (Al-Furqan: 61) and determination of sex (An-Najm: 45-46) are not contradictory to what we now know through established scientific knowledge.”

“It is inconceivable to many modern scientists who have also studied Qur’an that how can a person without extensive travel, writing ability and attending modern universities of knowledge, could explain things about history, nature and make socio-political predictions that would appear perfectly correct afterwards. Dr. Keith Moore, former President of the Canadian Association of Anatomists and of the American Association of Clinical Anatomists remarked at a conference in Cairo that details of human development as mentioned in Qur’an must have come to Muhammad from God, or Allah, because most of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later.”

“The historical accuracy of Qur’an’s socio-political predictions, perfect transmission through ages of its text, the unique eloquent language it carries and its accurate description of humans and nature should compel one to give it a sincere reading and reflect on its basic message. The basic message for us is that we are not created without any purpose. As per Islam, the purpose is to excel in our duties to Allah with a thankful attitude and be kind to all of His creations including humans, plants and animals we interact and live with.”

“If a religious text is transmitted generations after generations with perfect historical accuracy and consistency and whose descriptive statements about history and future are verified perfectly and whose descriptive statements about what we see across nature and within ourselves is accurate and verified by established discoveries of modern science, then it is certainly a very serious candidate for us to consult in exploring the question of why life and for what purpose? As a matter of fact, Qur’an is such a book which comes true on all the above mentioned characteristics.”

“To complement our internal urge to believe in a Creator, we are also provided guidance external to us. Allah has introduced Himself through His books and messengers (pbut). Qur’an, the last divine book in presenting the basic premise of Islam focuses our attention on some aspects of nature. Modern science instead of undermining faith has actually found nothing inconsistent about these statements with established facts of science.”

“Many scientific disciplines begin by not observing any sort of vital spark or consciousness in material events and proceed to deny that these things exist in living things, including themselves. Because consciousness does not fit into their mechanistic schemes they declare it illusory. Magicians make exactly the reverse argument. Observing consciousness in themselves and animals, they are magnanimous enough to extend it to all things to some degree—trees, amulets, planetary bodies, and all. This is a far more respectful and generous attitude than that of religions, most of whom won't even give animals a soul.”

“Does faith require abandoning reason, reflecting on the matter, searching for physical answers and finding physical solutions? As per religion, one can use material means, experimentally proven knowledge and medication by all means. For instance, in psychological disorders and problems, the cure needs to be searched in medication rather than spiritual exercises alone.”

“Religion is not just concerned with psychological and spiritual medication and meditation. It is concerned essentially with the question of why life and for what purpose. The religious answer based on historically transmitted knowledge is that we are created by the Creator and Who will reward us justly in the afterlife. The afterlife will actualize the cause and effect in ethical matters and establish absolute justice which we desire for every action and intention. Qur’an repeatedly reminds of the blessings of Allah in the form of matter and intelligence which we use for our comforts and cures. After using the matter and intelligence which exists not because of our efforts, how rational and ethical it is that we remain not only thankless, but negate the one Who is to be thanked altogether.”

“The sole purpose of religion is not to be a psychological panacea or just a little bit more numerous, better and different social set of norms. It is concerned with questions of why life and for what purpose. Both matter and intelligence exist without us creating them. We merely use them without being the original creators of those things. Internal to us, we have an urge to find meaning to life and our existence. Our consciousness asks for a suitable explanation. Have we come to exist by chance? It is highly unlikely given the extremely accurate conditions required in numerous factors for the life to exist. The human mind suggests that there should be a creator for everything which is not its own creator. Therefore, faith in God is not based on speculative conjecture of 'god of the gaps'. Taking a position that there must be a Creator of this universe is a logical answer instead of believing in existence due to blind random forces by chance.”

“Nowhere in Islam, is it said that one should replace physical efforts with mere supplication. Islam urges Muslims to explore and use nature for societal well-being and pursue economic sustenance. Tremendous advances in science happened in the heyday of Muslim civilization which stopped partly due to genocide and massacre carried out in Crusades and in the invasion of Baghdad by Mongols. Those who took science further in the West were also mostly religious people for a long period of time.”

“Prof. Pervez Hoodbhoy, a noted Physicist, asks that if Salat-e-Istasqa is performed, then why it does not rain often. He wrote: “The equations of fluid flow, not the number of earnest supplicants or quality of their prayers, determine weather outcomes.” The answer is that Salat-e-Istasqa is a voluntary prayer to ask Allah’s blessings. The collective performance of this prayer is not the replacement of physical efforts or understanding of physical phenomena. It only serves as a moment of reflection and reminder for the people who pray. For instance, when Qur’an says that Allah provides sustenance, it does not imply that we sit idle and do not engage in Kasb-e-Halal (legitimate economic enterprise). Likewise, if physical efforts or physical understanding can help in dealing with physical problems, then all efforts towards these ends shall be undertaken.”

“Prof. Stephen Hawking once said: “I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look around carefully before they cross the road.” Religious faith does not mean that after accepting faith, one can walk on water, fly in the air or defy physical limits in any other sense. Religion concerns with moral content in choices made with free will. Repeatedly, Qur’an asks people to strive for knowledge, discovery, exploration and virtuous livelihood. Nowhere there is a restriction on planning or in using material resources bestowed by the Creator.”

“Religion allows economic endeavours and scientific endeavours to achieve economic livelihood and convenience. It does not ask one to sit idle and expect to be fed naturally or automatically. It does not ask to avoid medicines and cures to treat illnesses. It does not discourage intellectual and scientific pursuits to discover cause and effect relations in the universe and make use of such knowledge. Even in religious knowledge, religion does not feed religious knowledge in brains automatically, but it asks to seek that knowledge by reading, deciphering, thinking and reflecting. Seeking knowledge is regarded as an obligation rather than fed as an effortless gift in humans. In fact, every endeavour which brings comfort, convenience, social good and welfare is an act of virtue and religion encourages one to cooperate in virtuous endeavours (Al- Maida: 2). Thus, in pursuit of livelihood or finding cure of a disease, religion does not prescribe some religious rituals alone.”

“Religion guides about ethics and morality in all human endeavours including scientific endeavours. For instance, religion would not allow using technology to kill someone, harm others and destroy resources and environment. As a matter of fact, 200 million people died in 20th century wars alone, which is equal to all of human population on earth living at the time of Jesus (pbuh). WWF reports that humans have destroyed half of all animal life in the last 40 years alone. Humans just make up 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals, according to a report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Scientists had termed the current age ‘Anthropocene’ due to the unprecedented loss caused by human activities in the modern age. In this kind of involvement of religion in scientific endeavours, religious values play a positive role in emphasizing responsibility, care, preservation and cooperation.”

“The second possible point of contact between religion and science can come in answering questions of origin, existence and meaning. These questions do not come in the domain of science. Nonetheless, still some scientists who do not believe in any Ultimate Creator and divine religion tend to argue for their held beliefs from some scientific theories. It is conveniently forgotten that any scientific theory has no concern whatsoever with the ‘will’ behind material cause and effect relation. Science can explain chemical processes, physical processes and biological processes involving material causes and effects. But, science does not concern with the purpose behind material processes.”

“Growing crops through chemical processes can be explained through science, but what end they are used for does not come under the domain of science. Chemistry can help in increasing productivity of food crops as well as making chemical weapons. Abortion of a baby without putting life of mother at risk can be explained through biology, but science does not answer whether it is right or wrong. Weapons of mass destruction can be made through knowledge of disciplines like nuclear physics, but using this knowledge to decimate entire human population in a city or country is a decision whose correctness or incorrectness cannot be judged or answered from science.”

“If there is a will to produce something or make something happen, then as long as the process of production involves material process, then it can be explained through science. If not all such material processes are comprehensible through science, they still potentially can be with advancement of science in future. However, the will and purpose to start the whole process does not come under the purview of science.”