Science may be headed for a bad case of indigestion

[Yeah, it's just supposed to look complicated.]

The line between science, a philosophy of explanation making and verification, and scientism, the belief that everything (or everything that matters) can and should be understood scientifically, is becoming weaker in the public consciousness.

The effect of attempting to apply science in domains of explanation to which it is not suited distorts the perspective and integrity of both science and the subject being investigated. Just to be clear, that's not good.

Sometimes when someone brings up scientism, the reaction is that people are afraid of the light of scientific scrutiny being shone in some places for fear of what it might reveal. That may be true in some cases.

Yet science is only one lens for explaining things. It's particularly suited to questions whose evidence is empirical (therefore measurable) and whose properties are consistent or patterns are predictable. To make a scientific approach fit some domains of investigation, the degree of extrapolation and assumptions necessary to find suitable evidence makes the whole enterprise shaky. If we assume W is related to X in this way, and that X affects Y in this way, and Y is connected to Z just so, and... and... and...

Some things are just poorly suited to scientific scrutiny. Which is not all just measurements and logic by the way. Someone has to decide which assumptions logic is to work with and which measurements matter. Moreover, creativity and artistry, strange thinking and though experiments considering what seems impossible and absurd are also necessary and profitable in the scientific enterprise. The image of everything unfolding meticulously step by step, moving inexorably toward a more and more accurate picture of reality is highly misleading.

Plus, there is more to life than just explaining the things we encounter and the mental boxes we put them in as we name and describe them. The experience of things, of life itself, is also important. To the degree science can enhance such experiences, it is a worthwhile endeavor. But science and its theories cannot replace such experiences.

Now no doubt some who read this will assume I am anti-science. This is untrue. In fact, anyone who really understand and appreciates science should be worried about the influence of scientism, not just among some scientists and popularizers of science, but the influence on public at large.

This is where the eating metaphor comes in. The more people want to cram everything down science's throat, the more frustrated they will be when science gets indigestion from trying to consume too many questions and areas of life experience. If this happens, the regurgitation on the part of the professional intellectual community, the rejection of prior attempts to scientize areas that were clearly not appropriate for the scope of scientific investigation, could cause a loss of trust in the science brand.

If scientific researchers are willing to admit they are entering difficult terrain, emphasize the tentativeness of their assumptions, and do so in the public eye, trying to see what science can or can't offer additional areas of inquiry sounds both reasonable and exciting. Just watch what you eat.