Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

842

TL;DR: What do you call someone who puts too much faith in science? How do you talk someone out if this

Is there a label for people who are like "The science says..." and "this study proves (rather than supports) x." This is , right? Do we call them "scientismists"? I know "fanatic" exists, but this needs something more.

Also, how do you politely argue with these people? For context I have an older brother ( a stepbrother technically, but he has been in my life ever since I can remember) who considers himself centrist and non-ideological because he pays attention to science and "the latest studies." I remember when this man thought dogs and cats could breed and when he literally thought one gene separated humanity from chimps ( because of our genomes having 99% similarity).

I'm not trying to say he's irredeemable for those bad ideas. I'm just saying that someone who has to have it explained to them why you never see catdogs outside of Nickelodeon and that humans have more than one hundred genes (I had to explain to him that he was implying this) maybe shouldn't act like the Lord of Science. Should I start with the basics, like defining science and how it works?

TL;DR: What do you call someone who puts too much faith in science? How do you talk someone out if this Is there a label for people who are like "The science says..." and "this study proves (rather than supports) x." This is [scientism](https://infogalactic.com/info/Scientism), right? Do we call them "scientismists"? I know "fanatic" exists, but this needs something more. Also, how do you politely argue with these people? For context I have an older brother ( a stepbrother technically, but he has been in my life ever since I can remember) who considers himself centrist and non-ideological because he pays attention to science and "the latest studies." I remember when this man thought dogs and cats could breed and when he literally thought one gene separated humanity from chimps ( because of our genomes having 99% similarity). I'm not trying to say he's irredeemable for those bad ideas. I'm just saying that someone who has to have it explained to them why you never see catdogs outside of Nickelodeon and that humans have more than one hundred genes (I had to explain to him that he was implying this) maybe shouldn't act like the Lord of Science. Should I start with the basics, like defining science and how it works?

(post is archived)

[–] • 2 pts

Explain to him that he is a religious nut, and is every bit as stupid as the religious people he ridicules. Call him stupid, call him gullible, and repeat these putdowns every time he brings up science. He needs to be beaten down and humbled, until he begins to doubt his own judgement. It may sound harsh but this is the only way someone so sure of themselves can be corrected (except for maybe extreme trauma).

[–] • 0 pt

every bit as stupid as the religious people he ridicules.

He actually isn't an atheist. He only got this way after becoming vegan and moving further left politically.

[–] • 2 pts

Proper atheists are the worst, but if he's a vegan and moving left, he's brainwashed, so maybe you can work off of that. People in general need more self awareness to grow.

Or maybe you could attack from a totally different angle - feed him redpills that seem totally unrelated/nonconflicting to his faith in "science" (political, cultural stuff?) so that he won't be able to use science to block them, then once you've got him digesting the core redpill of 'everything you know is a lie', he will begin to question his precious science without you having to say anything about it.

Also consider finding the right data (bellcurves, etc.) to use science to your advantage.

And if you're trying to redpill him, be encouraging rather than belittling like I suggested before. Belittling is more for hopeless NPC's - if you can't convert them you can at least subdue them under your terrifying power level.

[–] • 1 pt

Also consider finding the right data (bellcurves, etc.) to use science to your advantage.

I actually have The Bell Curve by Murray and Herrnstein. I suppose I'll have to stop procrastinating about reading it.

[–] • -1 pt

at least subdue them under your terrifying power level.

guys like you are my favorite ones to do this to. so keen and arrogant. so satisfying to topple.

[–] • 2 pts

" I remember when this man thought dogs and cats could breed" major lol, but science is great but no perfect, like pretty every other concepts convince d by man, the scientific method is definitely not perfect.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

I've always called 'em "science weenies", but I suppose you could call them sciencaites (derived via latin sciens, present participle of scire "to know"; -ca, the nominative neuter plural of -cus "characteristic of, like, typical, pertaining to"; and the latin-derived suffix -ite "relating to following someone or something") with the effective meaning of "followers of something like knowledge".

The biggest difficulty in arguing against these people is that they tend to be mental dullards of a sort - made so by the belief - and thus can't properly grok philosophical arguments - their belief; the meme; only lets them trust things that they believe can be measured, which is why they worship at the temple of the art of measurements to begin with.

Short of finding a way to make them aware of the meme sitting in their head, it's often better to drive in a wedge counter-idea that you can work to pry the parasite out of their minds. In this, it might be possible to take advantage of the fact that the modern day sciecaite cult has taken on a distinctly "liberal" bent, and is thus busy choking on the meme of equality as well.

They say that when the facts are on your side, you should bang on the facts (and if the tables try to turn on you, bang on the tables), so work the human biodiversity angle on this fool - get him to see the measurable differences between various groups of people, starting with ones more flattering to the cult's adopted worldview, and slowing tinging the pills ever redder with time.

You can't attack the scientism meme directly this way, but eventually it'll become difficult for them to ignore that the high priests in the temple of the art of measurements are themselves mostly a collection of ideologically driven cultists who keep re-measuring the same things until they get the data they want, then you'll cut the knees off the offending idea and it hopefully won't get much further than that.

[–] • 0 pt

so work the human biodiversity angle on this fool - get him to see the measurable differences between various groups of people, starting with ones more flattering to the cult's adopted worldview, and slowing tinging the pills ever redder with time.

I could probably start with neurological and behavioral differences in liberals and conservatives.

[–] • 0 pt

This is a good argument I guess maybe scienceism