Christopher Jay Javate October 7, 2019

2BSA5

1. What is scientism?

According to Webster, the first definition of scientism is "the methods, mental attitude, doctrines,
or modes of expression characteristic or held to be characteristic of scientists." This is not the
sense in which C. S. Lewis uses the word. Webster's second definition fits Lewis's usage well; "a
thesis that the methods of the natural sciences should be used in all areas of investigation including
philosophy, the humanities, and the social sciences and belief that only such methods can fruitfully
be used in the pursuit of knowledge."

a. How is scientism related to technocracy/scientocracy?

Scientism based from the philosophy of Luke Mastin is the broad-based belief that the assumptions
and methods of research of the physical and natural sciences are equally appropriate to all other
disciplines, including philosophy, the humanities and the social sciences. In relation to that, it is
based on the belief that natural science has authority over all other interpretations of life, and that
the methods of natural science form the only proper elements in any philosophical inquiry. The
term is sometimes used to indicate the improper use of science or scientific claims (as a
justification or authority) to a topic which is perceived to be beyond the scope of scientific inquiry.
In this context, Scientism can be seen as a faith that science has no boundaries, and that in due
time all human problems and all aspects of human endeavor will be dealt and solved by science
alone.

Technocracy is a system of governance where decision-makers are selected on the basis of

technological knowledge. Scientists, engineers, technologists, or experts in any field, would
compose the governing body, instead of elected representatives. Leadership skills would be
selected on the basis of specialized knowledge and performance, rather than parliamentary skills.
Technocracy in that sense of the word (is an entire government run as a technical or engineering
problem) is mostly hypothetical. In another commonly used sense, technocracy is any portion of a
bureaucracy that is run by technologists.

b. Was C.S. Lewis against Science?

C. S. Lewis respected science, but he deeply feared a scientocracy or scientists boasting

themselves with their presumptive authority to grasp political power. Lewis was concerned that the
modern rejection of absolute standards and objective values would leave mankind with no defense
against what some persons might do with the powers of science. His love of individual freedom and
his appreciation for people as creatures made in the image of God caused him to fear what might
be done to humanity if science, without Christian standards to restrain it, were to be given the
power of government to enforce what a few persons might plan for all the rest.

Lewis was not anti-science, but was opposed to 'Scientism', which may be defined as the wrong-
headed belief that modern science supplies the only reliable method of knowledge about the world
and also that scientists should be the ones to dictate public policy and even our moral and religious
beliefs simply on the basis of their scientific expertise.

2. The video contends that Science and Technology may be gaining increasing control over our
lives, potentially to the detriment of society. Do you agree? Does this match your own
observations and experiences?
Yes, I agree that Science and Technology is partly increasingly controlling our lives but not all. It is
evident because the rate at which science is progressing is really breath-taking. Based from my own
experiences, observations and from the history at about 50 years ago, one could imagine of what
we have achieved today. Earlier, computers were the size of many rooms. With the intervention of
mobile technology, we are able to produce computers that can fit into our pockets. We can know
what is happening all around the world at our fingertips. Newer version of phones and tablets were
released every few months claiming to have better sophisticated technology. These gadgets
constantly capture our attention. As a result, people replace their gadgets almost every year or
even few months.

Internet would become an apparatus that tracks our every move, erasing important aspects of
privacy and free speech in our social and political lives. The technology we thought we were using
to make life more efficient started using us some time ago. It is now attempting to reshape our
social behavior. While being connected is good, too much of a good thing can backfire. Being
constantly connected has made us not as effective at problem solving, not as good at innovation
and creativity, and not so great with friends and family. But this is not technology’s fault blame
how we use it. It’s true that technology has given us the ability to stay constantly connected,
constantly at work, but it’s not technology’s fault. Let’s instead look in the mirror and realize
who’s really to blame here. It’s time to take control of our technology and our lives so that we can
rediscover the wonderful treasures that are buried in those separate realities we once had.

The proper use of technology is that it should be a means to serve us and make our lives easier. A
key requirement is that we should be in control. We should not serve technology and allow our
gadgets to control our lives, social skills or decisions. When this happens, it can endanger the
proper development of the personality and hamper the social relationships needed for life together
in society.

3. According to the film, how is science being likened to a religion? What were examples of
movements in history that became cause for concern that the scientific method was being
applied beyond its appropriate boundaries?

Reference in C.S. Lewis that science turned into religion is just a glorified form of magic. Lewis
commends science, but refutes scientism, the belief or ideology that science is the best or only test
for truth of any kind. As such, scientism leads to an exaggerated trust and almost blind faith in the
ability of “science,” especially science divorced from God, to answer any question and solve any
problem. Lewis believes science is a necessary, important and valid way of understanding reality
until it becomes a dogmatic, pseudo-religion that plays on people’s gullibility and refuses to
consider new evidence that undermines current accepted theory. In other words, it becomes
irrational. All of this scientism of scientific religion leads to science as power where science
becomes the dictator of the culture. Since nothing is sacred to science except its own dogma, it
can lead to some frightening conclusions, such as eugenics, euthanasia and socialist and fascist
tyranny. Lewis believed science was good, but its sphere of influence is, and must be, limited.

The second program opens with Lewis saying Darwin and Spencer built their foundations on illusions
of sand. At its most basic level, evolution says we have common ancestors, a position that’s less
and less credible as time passes. Secondly, evolution believes the physical world (including the
molecular and subatomic world) is run by blind, unguided processes. The second program addresses
each of these canards.

The final episode is an argument for Intelligent Design. Lewis moved slowly to the position of
Intelligent Design. He started from the argument from Beauty, then the argument from morality,
then the argument from reason, then the argument from functional complexity, and finally from
the laws of nature. One of his students was a famous atheist, Anthony Flew. Lewis encouraged his
students to follow the arguments wherever they lead. Flew did just that and, at the end of his life,
recanted his atheism, affirmed Intelligent Design and accepted the possibility that the story of
Jesus Christ in the New Testament documents might be plausible. Of course, believing in Intelligent
Design is not the same as believing in the Bible or believing in God in the person of Jesus Christ.
However, it does eventually lead to that point.

4. Science is supposed to promote critical thinking. According to the film, how might science
actually be promoting credulous, gullible thinking?

Science used to develop critical thinking abilities of individuals. Nowadays, with its tremendous
advancement in technology, we are deeply amazed at how things are made. We are so
overwhelmed and we completely rely on this technology that we seem to trust no one but these. It
is now a fact that we rely on science and technology to solve everything for us. In fact, we arrive
at some conclusions and decisions based on what they suggest at us. With the ease and
convenience they bring, we tend to act and decide so fast that we fail to assess or study situations
very well. Science and Technology has indeed made life easier in many aspects, but it made us
somehow lazy and adamant.

5. The film contends that much of modern science is about exerting power over the world. Is
this a virtue/advantage or a liability/disadvantage?

Modern Science has truly taken hold of the world for all the discoveries and technologies it
brought. He who holds the latest in technology holds power and influence over the other. He has
the power to dictate and dominate the world. When science is used to make man’s life at the peak
of success without setting aside the natural processes, then it is an advantage. When science is
used to discover new things without disrespect to God’s creation, then it is a virtue. God created
Science, but science can never create God. We should never lose faith, for it will be faith that will
save us.

6. Why is the title of the film “The Magician’s Twin”?

The phrase “the magician’s twin” comes from Lewis himself. As John West points out, “the
comparison between science and magic runs throughout a number of his works” (p. 19), the two
ideas of science and magic being similar in that they are able to function as an alternative religion
in their encouragement of a lack of skepticism, and in their quest for power. The video’s title
comes from a reference in C.S. Lewis that science turned into religion is just a glorified form of
magic.

Christopher Jay Javate October 7, 2019

2BSA5
 Film Title: Village of the Watermills:
Akira Kurosawa

1. According to the old man, why have they chosen not to use electricity? Is the reason he gives
apparent today with other forms of modern technology.

The old man said that they don’t need electricity because according to him “People get too used to
convenience. They think convenience is better.” Another statement that the old man said is that
“People today forgotten they are really just a part of nature. Yet, they destroy the nature on which
our lives depend. They always think they can make something better. Especially scientists. They
may be smart, but most do not understand the heart of nature. They only invent things that in the
end make people unhappy. Yet, they are so proud of their inventions. What is worse, most people
are, too. They view them as if they were miracles. They worship them. They do not know it, but
they are losing nature. They do not see that they are going to perish. The most important things for
human beings are clean air and clean water and trees and grass that produce them. Everything is
being dirtied. Polluted forever. Dirty air, dirty water, dirtying the heart of men.”

This statement implies that as men, we do not need the inventions made by scientists as it draws us
away from nature from which from the beginning, we are a part of. He also implied that these
inventions will be also be our end. For the old man, the only thing that we need is clean air, clean
water and trees.

Although the old man has a point, the reason that he gave is not apparent with other forms of
modern technology. As today, we are living in an era in which technology plays a huge part in the
daily lives of the people.

2. Compare the lifestyle of the Village of the Watermills with the settlements during the
Agricultural Revolution as discussed in “The Waves of Technology”

The lifestyle of the people in the Village of the watermills closely resembles those from the
Agricultural Revolution as both of these lifestyles involves farming and domesticating animals for
their own use. Mass production of crops for the consumption of the people and trading is very
evident in both style of living. There are a lot of similarities that can be pointed out of from both
of them but those are the most evident and relevant.

3. Is the film critical of scientists if so, in what way? Based on the film, is Science and
Technology really necessary to attain “the good life”

Science and technology is the reflection of the progress of men as rational beings. The inventions
that we have made and points that we have reached have made us into a better society in which
the impact of technology can be seen at every corner. These technologies have made our lives
economically better in fields such as agriculture, health and medicine, communication, disaster
preparedness and in many others.

These things are not necessary for us to live as a human being but these are necessary for us to
move forward as a society and uplift our economy in a lot of other aspects. Technology can help us
break through borders and pass through our limits as people.

4. How do the main point of the video compare to those of “The Magician’s Twin”?

The Magicians Twin is a video that mainly focuses on the viewpoint of people to science, what they
think science is and how it affects the minds of the people and on their perspectives. The Village of
the watermills, on the other hand focuses on how people have become very dependent on
technology even though men can live without it.

These videos are great implications on how far have we have journeyed as people. The wonders of
science and technology can never be truly grasped by the human mind as its knowledge is vast and
wide. It is for us to know what else can we do, what are the things that haven’t yet made and what
else is there to find out in the world that we live in.