Answer the following questions: (2-3 sentences ONLY)

1. Why was Lewis very much a skeptic and critic of scientism? Was he against science?
(20 points)

- He was opposed to an ideology that in his view had been confused with science, it
was a particular materialistic approach that wanted to reduce everything that we could
learn scientifically to materialistic causes blind undirected causes, Lewis thought that
science was a legitimate enterprise. He was never against science itself what he was
against with was the is scientism.

2. How did Lewis explain the following: (20 points)

2.1 science as religion

- He regards science, properly speaking, as a subset of religion. He believes science to

be a fundamentally imaginative enterprise. He argues that because scientific statements
tend to be univocal and strive to be verifiable, they are rather small statements, all
things considered.

2.2 science as credulity

- He observed that most individuals easily believe something when they heard that it
claims for the sake of science. Regardless of whether there are no great reasons and
proof to back it up. He simply needed to convey that before accepting we ought to grasp
it more and affirm assuming it's truly evident.

2.3 science as power

- To the public, science with its capabilities and conceivable outcomes is so perfect and
perpetual and appears to be magical with what you can nearly find with science and
with how you can manage it. With the fear of obscure individuals submitting to the force
of science.
3. Why did Lewis think that modern science is far more dangerous than magic? (20
points)

- Science is undeniably more perilous than magic since wizardry fizzles. If it doesn't
work then, at that point, individuals couldn't utilize it to control others or perhaps the
world while science has the potential. If you find the right charge, the right treatment,
you can control them.

4. Why did Lewis become concerned about the rise of sciencetocrcy? How does
sciencetocracy relate to scientism? (20 points)

- Since scientocracy is the work to surrender the reins of social and political capacity to
the first-class gathering of specialists professing to talk for the sake of science. We can't
ensure that assuming we hand it over to them, they will control it to acquire their needs.

5. Based on what you learned in the documentary film, how does scientism pose a
threat to the human person flourishing in science and technology? Why should science
be guided by an ethical basis that is not dictated by science itself? (20 points)

- Scientism represents a threat to the human individual thriving in science and

innovation since it paints every one of the people who are prospering to be the terrible
ones yet in truth not every one of them has awful expectations. Science ought to be
directed by a moral premise because as expressed before it has extraordinary abilities
and vast potential outcomes without direction it very well might be controlled and utilized
for abhorrent purposes.