Is scientism a self defeating epistemology?

Question

Some who have argued against the validity of scientism have argued that the view that only science can uncover truth is not a scientific discovery but rather a epistemology. Hence it has been claimed that it is self refuting. Is this a valid critique of this view or can scientism still be defended?

Answer 1

It can't be defended. You have pointed to its need for a foundation. That is the first lack it shows.

And I will bet you can't define 'science' in a way that eliminates more than one answer to many quesitons.

My favorite objection is that it is utterly unable to interpret itself.

If I solve an equation for how many boys to cut a lawn if this lawn is X acres and it takes 1 boy Y hours to trim an acre -- and I come up with a negative number or an improper fraction I have to redefine things in terms of man-hours. I also have boundary problems. How long to cut a 10-inch square area? well, you wouldn't use a boy or a mower!!.

But even where you might point to what is agree upon -- IS IT? Say, Quantum Mechanics

Influential interpretations

1. 4.1Copenhagen interpretation
2. 4.2Many worlds
3. 4.3Quantum information theories
4. 4.4Relational quantum mechanics
5. 4.5QBism
6. 4.6Consistent histories
7. 4.7Ensemble interpretation
8. 4.8De Broglie–Bohm theory
9. 4.9Quantum Darwinism
10. 4.10Transactional interpretation
11. 4.11Objective collapse theories
12. 4.12Consciousness causes collapse (von Neumann–Wigner interpretation)
13. 4.13Quantum logic
14. 4.14Modal interpretations of quantum theory
15. 4.15Time-symmetric theories
16.