Scientism: A Willing Ignorance

In 1884, Edwin A. Abbott wrote Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions. The book is set in a world inhabited by two-dimensional shapes that play roles within this two dimensional world. The shapes see and experience life in one dimension, much how we as 3D persons see the world as a two dimensions. The inhabitants of this world flatly deny (pun intended) that there can be a world that has more than two dimensions because, in their experience, they have never seen a 3D object, and nor can they because of their limited ability to see or measure. Therefore, they reject the idea that anything beyond flatland exists.

This is the case until a sphere passes through Flatland. The 2D shapes cannot take this sphere in fully, in fact they can only see him as different sizes circles as he literally passes through Flatland, transcending the binds of the two dimensions and experiencing his third. Not only that, but to further prove himself, the sphere takes a square up and out of flatland in order to give him a birds-eye view, and forever changing the square's outlook on reality. For a clearer summary, click here.

I want to take a moment to look at this book as a commentary on the phenomena of scientism that is rampant within our culture. Scientism is the philosophical, not scientific (more on that later), idea that, if something cannot be measured or observed by science, it cannot exist. This idea is subscribed to by everyone from leading atheists to your run-of-the-mill cultural devotee with a bone to pick against organized religion. Scientism-based thought generally come at the head of the atheistic apologetic, and is presented as being at odds with any notion of faith.

However, scientism is a philosophy that does not hold up under any kind of scrutiny. First of all, scientism is not scientific. The basis of science is to investigate and uncover that which has NOT been discovered. To say that all that exists is only what can be measured scientifically is to state one of two things. Either (a) you are basing life on the assumption that we currently fully understand and can measure all forces of nature and movements within the word, or (b) you are open to the idea that reality literally shifts every time a new discovery or theory is made. Under the former assumption, theoretical scientists simply become nerds with an imagination, and under the latter assumption, you are looking at reality itself as something that is inherently unstable, awaiting the next observation to further shift 'truth' into something else.

The second problem with scientism is that fact that it is a self-defeating proposition. To one that would say to me "all that is real is measurable and observable", I would respond by asking, "is that idea measurable and observable?" By that I mean, can you scientifically prove to me that all forces in the world are measurable and observable? Can you prove the content of that statement through the scientific method (developed by a catholic) and prove you hypothesis correct? The answer is an unadulterated "No Freaking Way!" To believe so is to contradict yourself, your purpose, and proves to me that you're simply a Dawkins fanboy with too much time to kill.

If this is you, you are terrible...

Finally, scientism does not leave room for the idea that there is something beyond our experience. Much like the inhabitants of Flatland, subscribers to scientism assume that our experience is the pinnacle of what can be known, and that our instruments for measurement are capable of measuring all that is. But if we cannot scientifically and empirically prove beyond any doubt that the basis of scientism is true, then room must be left for faith in something beyond what our 3D perspective can behold.

Honestly, I think the rejection of faith comes from our western fear of losing control. If we can measure every part of reality, we can then control and monitor every part of reality. However, if reality goes beyond what we can know with our senses, and if there is something that inhabits a world beyond our simple three dimensions, passing through yet transcending the reality we can know by observation, then it must be (a) more powerful than us, (b) beyond our control, and (c) know us better than we can know ourselves, just as we know the ins and outs of a character we draw or a shape we see.

We must allow ourselves, like the square in the story, to be lifted above what we know in order to see reality as it is, and to take in the idea that there is something more. The square did not experience the full length, width, and height of the three dimensional world, but he knew it was there. He could apply that knowledge back into his more limited reality and allow it to help shape him (more puns!). my encouragement is to ask yourself the question, "what if there are things we cannot measure?", and allow faith in something beyond the arrogant western view of self. Only then can we begin to grasp true reality.

St. Joseph, pray for us

God, Father in heaven, bless us.