Scientific Aesthetes

Curtis White observes in The Science Delusion that scientists regularly appeal, without admitting it, to extra-scientific values. Natural selection, Dawkins says, lifts us “to the dizzy heights of complexity, beauty and apparent design that dazzle us today” (quoted p. 16)). Hawking finds the “miracle” of a fit between logic and world “amazing” (17).

Not that White blames them for getting all weepy: “I get weepy-eyed over their discoveries. Who can look at images from the Hubble telescope and not feel something very powerful. . . ?” (22). He does blame the new atheists and the neuroscience reductionists for “their lack of curiosity about what this feeling of aw means.” After all, “Amazement-before-the-cosmos cannot be tested or proved by observation, and it is not predictive of anything other than itself. In the hands of science, beauty is just a tautology, or a dogma” (22).

White finds scientists’ scorn for philosophy “a kind of bigotry” that shows that science “doesn’t know what its own discoveries mean” (25). Yet scientific dogmatists reject non-scientific explanations.Science is left in a double-bind: “science confesses that it doesn’t know how to provide meaning for its own knowledge, but all other forms of meaning are forbidden” (27).

We’re glad you’re enjoying First Things

Create an account below to continue reading.

Or, subscribe for full unlimited access

 

Already a have an account? Sign In