Scott Alexander defends 'scientism', arguing that scientific thinking provides valuable tools for addressing non-scientific questions and avoiding common cognitive biases. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the concept of 'scientism', often considered a fallacy where people naively believe science can solve everything. He argues that while science may not directly solve philosophical questions, the scientific method and thinking can be valuable in non-scientific fields. He explains that scientists have learned to calibrate their thinking against hard reality, leading to a more skeptical and minimalist approach in other areas. The post discusses how scientific thinking helps avoid common cognitive biases and provides a better framework for evaluating claims in non-scientific fields. Scott concludes by 'reclaiming' the term scientism, defining it as a view of hypothesis-space that accounts for human fallibilities and maintains a high burden of proof. Shorter summary