Talk:Scientistic materialism

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of science

This article should probably be merged with "Materialism," because the easily-found sources conflate the two. To the extent that people talk about "scientific materialism" though, it's to make the argument: "If physics is the only thing controlling the world, as opposed to gods and spirits, then there can be no real morality, therefore people will be evil, therefore that can't be true." The main Materialism article seems to headline the distinction between "monism" and "dualism" rather than the more obvious science/religion conflict, which seems odd based on what people would want to know about it. My own edit to this article adds a little information but is weak. --Kris Schnee 09:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the term "scientific materialism" is exclusive to critics of the view point (although it may have appeared so from the sources available online 13 years ago, when the above comment was posted). An example of a prominent philosopher self-identifying as a "scientific materialist" can be found at around 6:15 of this TED talk by David Chalmers [1] - Tim314 (talk) 21:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is called "Scientistic materialism", not Scientific materialism. --Hob Gadling (talk) 02:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, not only is the article basically a one-liner of someone's opinion, the title is actually a misspelling

i made an account for this

how can you get an article deleted? this article actually covers the topic well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_naturalism Tdignan1 (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Deletion process. --Hob Gadling (talk) 02:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The metaphysical naturalism article doesn't directly mention scientific materialsm, so don't really help someone understand what scientific materialism is. Also, in defense of this "article" and its opinionation, Herman Daly uses the term extensively in the book "Beyond Growth" (1996) to describe scientists like Carl Sagan, Edward O Wilson and Stephen Jay Gould. He seems to look down on the perspective, so this is at least one data point to back up the article's point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.150.139.50 (talk) 16:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it is a misspelling, but at best "scientistic materialism" is an obscure alternative form of "scientific materialism". Despite what is implied in the article, I can find no evidence that the non-standard form "scientistic materialism" is used by the Discovery Institute in the Wedge Document or anywhere else. A statement at the top of the article claims that scientistic materialism" is not to be confused with scientific materialism", but this is not explained and probably isn't true. Unless this term really does mean something different, it is not meet the standard of notability and so the article should be deleted. Chappell (talk) 14:26, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]