A poetic argument against scientism
Wendell Berry's book is the best argument I have read against the &quot;religion&quot; of scientism practiced by our culture in quite some time. The Enlightenment is dead, and unfortunately many in and out of science refuse to acknowledge it. Mathematical rationalism that was thought to be the best access to ALL human knowledge and wisdom during the Enlightenment. Modern science emerged as the standard bearer of the Enlightenment towards this lofty goal, replacing all other epistemologies. By the mid-twentieth century, epistemologies like philosophy, theology, and mythology were seen as either arcane or trivial - certainly unscientific (sic). E.O. Wilson (one of my favorite biologists) in CONSILIENCE writes at the apogee of this thinking and yes, faith. In CONSILIENCE Wilson wishes to either ignore or concretize the divine - I can't quite get which. Much of our culture does pretty much the same. Wendell Berry's argument is that we must look past scientific description and look deeper into the world around us to achieve wisdom and  appreciate the &quot;depth of the world.&quot; The superstition (actually a religion to my mind) that Berry argues against is the notion that through science we can come to understand it ALL, which is called scientism. Yet, Berry acknowledges and celebrates science's value to our culture from a practical and philosophical perspective but warns us against relying on it for moral judgment. Scientism lacks soul, spirit - it is a cold &quot;religion&quot; that does not acknowledge the deep mystery of the universe, because this mystery is just another problem to be solved by measurement and experiment. Berry's implicit argument is that no moral culture can arise from it. Science is but one way to come to understand our place in the universe, and we are warned in Berry's book that we should not unduly privilege it since science cannot come to an understanding of the divine aspects of existence.