Against Scientism

09 May 2025

Mary Midgley, one of the so-called Oxford Quartet (along with Elizabeth Anscombe, Iris Murdoch, and Philippa Foot), was one of the UK's most prominent public intellectuals. She didn't publish her first book until she was nearly 60 years old, but she wrote and spoke prolifically about the value of the humanities, about environmentalism, and about science. In fact she loved science so much that she became a vocal critic of scientism—the idea that science can explain everything.

Science can explain a whole lot of things, incredibly well. But it will never be able to settle questions in ethics or metaphysics. Physics, for example, may be able to break the world down into its smallest physical parts, but it can’t tell us how living things work; nor can it tell us how our minds work. And this isn't just a question of the current state of knowledge: no matter how much data we compile, Midgley thought, there are always going to be bigger questions that science just can’t answer. Scientists should stick to science, and stay out of domains where they don’t belong.

One of the things science is useful for, according to Midgley, is reminding ourselves of our actual nature. “We are not just rather like animals," Midgley wrote; "we are animals.” We've managed to convince ourselves that there's this giant category of beings over there, in an enormous heap—whales, hummingbirds, platypuses, axolotls—and a separate category consisting of just one form of life: us. We do that in order to feel special. But we're not. We're not even special, says Midgley, in thinking we are special! When a bird sings, she writes, it’s saying “Hurrah, hurrah, it’s me, it’s mine, I’ve got it, I am the greatest.” (Midgley was brilliant for a turn of phrase.)

So science can teach us about our place in the world. And science can teach us even more: it can tell us that everything on this planet is part of one giant living system. (Midgley was a big fan of the “Gaia” hypothesis.)

But if even the “Gaia” hypothesis is part of science, what's left that science can’t explain? That’s a difficult question, but one our guest will have things to say about. It’s Clare MacCumhaill, from Durham University, co-author of Metaphysical Animals: How Four Women Brought Philosophy Back to Life.

SUBSCRIBE NOW FOR
UNLIMITED LISTENING

Comments (9)

Mounfem

Friday, May 16, 2025 -- 12:27 PM

This article offers a

This article offers a refreshing take on the limits of science, especially through Mary Midgley’s lens. Her argument against scientism—that not everything can be measured or explained by data—is especially relevant in today’s overly analytical world. It reminds me of how games like BitLife attempt to simulate human lives but ultimately can’t replicate the depth of ethics, emotion, or metaphysical questions we face. No matter how detailed the mechanics, there’s always more to being human than logic or systems—exactly what Midgley stood for.