After reading Science Is Not Your Enemy by Steven Pinker, I can tell that he is very passionate about the advancement of science. Pinker and Lehrer both talk about science in their texts, but Lehrer thinks that science could use some help from the arts. Both of them can agree on the fact that reductionism has not helped science progress in any way. Reductionism was mentioned in both of their essays and it seems that neither of them are for it. Pinker says in his essay that “Demonizers of scientism often confuse intelligibility with a sin called reductionism,” which goes against scientism. Then Lehrer proceeds to say that “The paradox of neuroscience is that its astonishing progress has exposed the limitations of its paradigm, as reductionism has failed to solve our emergent mind,”. Reductionism is the practice of analyzing and describing a complex phenomenon in terms of phenomena that are held to represent a simpler or more fundamental level, especially when this is said to provide a sufficient explanation. Both writers would agree that reductionism has no place in science because it has failed to explain the meaning behind it. Reductionism, according to these two writers has not been able to explain phenomenon, which has only made it harder to discover the mysteries of the mind or any part of science. This term is considered a sin in Pinker’s mind because it has no valid place and has not proved anything to be true. After gathering these quotes, I have realized that reductionism doesn’t hold a place in science and that this word actually makes people of science upset. Pinker and Lehrer may have two different views on how science should advance, but they are in agreement when it comes to one way that won’t help at all.

Science has plot holes and makes mistakes because scientists are trying to prove something that might not actually be real. I don’t believe in Santa Claus or aliens for that matter, but I do believe in karma and fate. In Pinker’s essay it says that, “There is no such thing as fate, providence, karma, spells, curses, augury, divine retribution, or answered prayers…”, which I don’t totally agree with. When I was younger I always remember, that for 2 weeks in the summer I had to go to CCD, which I didn’t enjoy but I had to. I was taught that if you pray to God that he will answer your prayer and that is something that I will always believe. I also do believe in karma and fate because it has happened to me. Now I know there is no proof and a scientist may say that it is coincidence, but I don’t think so. I believe in these things because I have witnessed them firsthand and it has affected me. Science is all about facts and numbers in order for something to be true so that’s why scientists can’t believe in something that they can’t measure. I think that’s why scientists go a little crazy sometimes because not everything they will test will prove to be true. Sometimes science doesn’t always work, so you got to just trust fate and your gut in order to believe that something is true.