Argumentative strategies against scientism: an overview

References

• Alexander, D. 2018. Is There Purpose in Biology? Oxford: Lion Hudson.
   Google Scholar
• Alston, W. P. 1996. A Realist Conception of Truth. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arbesman, S. 2013. The Half-Life of Facts. Why Everything we Know has an Expiration Date. New York: Current.
   Google Scholar
• Bavinck, J. H. 1960. An Introduction to the Science of Missions. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Clayton, P., and J. Schloss. 2004. Evolution and Ethics. Human Morality in Biological and Religious Perspective. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
   Google Scholar
• Craig, W. L., and J. P. Moreland. 2012. The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• De Ridder, J. 2014. “Science and Scientism in Popular Science Writing.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 3 (12): 23–39.
   Google Scholar
• De Ridder, J. 2018. “Kinds of Knowledge, Limits of Science.” In Scientism, Prospects and Problems, edited by De Ridder, Jeroen, Rik Peels, and René van Woudenberg, 190–219. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ducasse, C. J. 1961. A Critical Examination of the Belief in Life After Death. Springfield: Ill: Thomas.
   Google Scholar
• Ecklund, E. H. 2019. Secularity and Science. What Scientists Around the World Really Think About Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greco, J. 2000. Putting Skeptics in Their Place. The Nature of Skeptical Arguments and Their Role in Philosophical Inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gottlieb, A. 2019. “Recasting the 'Scientism' Debate“. In Stephen Grimm (ed.), Varieties of Understanding, 93–108. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, P. 2015. The Territories of Science and Religion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hietanen, Johan, Petri Turunen, Ilmari Hirvonen, Janne Karisto, Ilkka Pattiniemi, and S. Henrik. 2020. “How Not to Criticise Scientism.” Metaphilosophy 51: 522–547. doi:10.1111/meta.12443
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobbes, T. 1656. “Six Lessons to the Professors of Mathematics.” In The English Works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury Vol. 7, edited by W. Molesworth, 1845. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans.
   Google Scholar
• Jongepier, F., Q. Cassam. 2020. Radically Self-Deceived? Not So Fast, edited by Peels, De Ridder, and Van Woudenberg, 152–159.
   Google Scholar
• Klapwijk, J. 2008. Purpose in the Living World? Creation and Emergent Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ladyman, J. 2018. “Scientism with a Human Face.” In Scientism: Prospects and Problems, edited by Jeroen de Ridder, Rik Peels, and René van Woudenberg, 106–126. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ladyman, J., and D. Ross. 2010. Every Thing Must Go. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laudan, L. 1986. Science and Values. The Aims of Science and Their Role in Scientific Debate. Oakland: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lowe, E. J. 1996. Subjects of Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mavrodes, G. 1985. “Self-Referential Incoherence.” American Philosophical Quarterly 22: 65–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medawar, P. 1984. The Limits of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mizrahi, M. 2017. “In Defense of Weak Scientism: A Reply to Brown.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 6: 9–22.
   Google Scholar
• Moreland, J. P. 1992. Christianity and the Nature of Science. A Philosophical Investigation. Grand Rapids: Baker.
   Google Scholar
• O’ Connor, T. 2005. “Freedom with a Human Face.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy XXIX: 207–227. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4975.2005.00113.x
   Google Scholar
• O’ Connor, T. 2020. The Emergence of Free, Intentional Control, edited by Peels et al., 121–127.
   Google Scholar
• Peels, R. 2020. “Should We Accept Scientism? The Argument from Self-Referential Incoherence.” In What is Scientific Knowledge? An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology of Science, edited by Kevin Ray McCain, and Kostas Kampourakis, 274–287. Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Peels, R., and R. van Woudenberg. 2021. The Cambridge Companion to Common-Sense Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Plantinga, A. 2007. “Materialism and Christian Belief.” In Persons, Human and Divine, edited by Peter van Inwagen, and Zimmerman Dean, 99–141. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Plantinga, A. 2010. Where the Conflict Really Lies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ranalli, C. 2021. “The Special Value of Experience.” Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Mind 1: 130–167. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198845850.003.0006
   Google Scholar
• Ratzsch, D. 1986. Philosophy of Science: The Natural Sciences in Christian Perspective. Downers Grove, Ill: IVP.
   Google Scholar
• Rescher, N. 1999. The Limits of Science. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, A. 2011. The Atheist’s Guide to Reality. New York/London: Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, A. 2018. How History Gets Things Wrong. The Neuroscience of Our Addiction to Stories. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schramm, W. R. 1935. Approaches to a Science of English Verse. University of Iowa studies. New series, no. 297.
   Google Scholar
• Searle, J. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stenmark, M. 2001. Scientism. Science, Ethics and Religion. Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, M. Y. 2010. Science and Religion in Dialogue 2 vols. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Swinburne, R. 1991. The Existence of God. Rev ed.. Oxford: Clarendon.
   Google Scholar
• Swinburne, R. 1997. Simplicity as Evidence for Truth. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swinburne, R. 2008. Revelation. 2nd ed.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swinburne, R. 2013. Mind, Brain, and Free Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swinburne, R. 2019. Are We Bodies or Souls? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Unger, P. 1974. “An Argument for Scepticism.” Philosophical Exchange 5: 131–155.
   Google Scholar
• Van Woudenberg, R. 2012. “Limits of Science and the Christian Faith.” Science And Christian Belief 24: 129–148.
   Google Scholar
• Van Woudenberg, R. 2014. “Both Random and Guided.” Ratio 28: 332–348. doi:10.1111/rati.12073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Woudenberg, R. 2018a. An Epistemological Critique of Scientism 2018, edited by Peels De Ridder, and Van Woudenberg, 167–189.
   Google Scholar
• Van Woudenberg, R. 2018b. “The Nature of the Humanities.” Philosophy (London, England) 93: 109–140. doi:10.1017/S003181911700047X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Woudenberg, R. 2021. In The Epistemology of Reading and Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Woudenberg, R., R. Peels, and J. de Ridder. 2018. “Putting Scientism on the Philosophical Agenda.” In Scientific Challenges to Common Sense Philosophy, edited by Peels, Rik, Jeroen de Ridder, and René van Woudenberg, 1–27. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Van Woudenberg, R., and J. Rothuizen-van der Steen. 2016. “Science and the Ethics of Belief.” Journal for the General Philosophy of Science 47: 349–362. doi:10.1007/s10838-015-9313-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williamson, T. 2000. Knowledge and its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wolterstorff, N. 1996. John Locke and the Ethics of Belief. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, D. 2012. “Personal Identity and the Survival of Death.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Death, edited by Ben Bradley, F. Fred, and J. Johansson, 97–154. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar