The Limits of "Trust the Science"

Timothy Birdnow

"Follow the Science" really means "follow me!"

A 75-Year-Old Warning about Those Who Say ‘Listen to the Science’

Author Jon Miltmore quotes Hayek, who says:

"

here is no such thing as a scientific ought,” Mises wrote, echoing a famous argumentby David Hume. "Science is competent to establish what is.” (For a deeper dive on the is-ought problem, read Hume’s celebrated 1729 work, A Treatise on Human Nature.)

I disagree; Science in many instances does not even do that. It is the pursuit of what is, and that only from a purely material and mechanistic perspective.

Science is woefully inadequate in dealing with many issues. If you want the meaning of life don't read a science book; read philosophy or religion.

And Science changes as we learn, and sometimes it goes down the wrong track. Anyone remember phrenology? Blood letting? Eugenics? All of these were Science, even "settled science" in their day.

What our modern era does is worship Scientism, which is making a religion out of Science.

That said, Hayek is on point with this. If we had "followed the Science" we would still have stomach ulcers. We would still think the Earth was the center of the universe and the sun revolves around it. We would still use leeches in medicine.

What science is is logic and common sense, mixed with facts. Anyone can do science. Not everyone can do it well, granted.

I would add the great inventors of history and particularly the 19th century were NOT scientists but rather just smart guys. Very few had advanced degrees. Didn't need them, and they probably made would have been detrimental as the "settled science" would not have been questioned enough to attack the problem.

At any rate, it's a good essay; do read it.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:35 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 3 kb.