The Rise of Scientism

In one of his books (I can’t recall which) the philosopher Zizek relates a saying that ‘to truly kill a man, you must plant flowers on his grave.’

It means that if you are to thoroughly erase something it is not enough to bury it – since there will be a place and a reminder of what has been buried – you have to plant something else in its place – a distraction.

Something like this seems to happen often: we take something significant, and we bury it and put something ornamental in its place.

In recent years ‘diversity’, ‘authenticity’, ‘innovation’, ‘disruption’, ‘digital’ have been subject to something like this process. We take something genuine and profound, and as a way of defending against it we build a set of superficial rituals in its place: effectively preventing people from ever thinking about the real thing. We have a 'diversity process' and an 'innovation initiative' and a 'digital value-statement'.

The example closest to home for me is ‘learning’. Learning is now so buried so deeply that it may prove impossible to dig it up. In its place a sprawling mass of ornamental rituals called ‘education’ have sprung up, and these are now so well established that many people think that when one says ‘education’ one is actually referring to learning (as Owen pointed on on the GoodPractice podcast).

Last but not least is the process that science now seems to be undergoing. These days everyone likes to talk about ‘evidence’ – everywhere people are brandishing ‘evidence’, spreading it on their prejudices like ketchup on a hot-dog.

But this is scientism, not science: with scientism one goes in search of evidence to back up whatever conviction one happens to have. And today that is easier than ever – we have created a world in which climate change can be denied on the basis of evidence, people can find evidence that supports their anti-vaccination stance – practically any belief can cloak itself in the protective mantle of evidence.

But this was never science. Let’s not allow scientism to bury science. Science is the process of coming up with and testing theories. The hypothetico-deductive method. Evidence was only ever intended as a tool by which to support or reject a theory – never as a crutch for opinion. Evidence only ever serves theory, never opinion.

When people talk of ‘evidence’ let’s not be afraid to ask the scientific question: ‘evidence for what theory?’