A contemporary form of positivist moralism updated for the 21st century—drawing on the prestige of
science while ignoring the nuance of actual scientific practice. The neopositivist moralist deploys "
science says" as a conversation-stopper, treats any deviation from scientific consensus as moral failing, and uses scientific authority to launder their own prejudices. Unlike classical positivism, which at least engaged philosophical questions about
knowledge, neopositivist moralism simply weaponizes the cultural authority of
science without understanding its methods, limits, or uncertainties. It's the online commenter who declares any question about vaccines "anti-
science" and therefore evil; the pundit who treats skepticism of any official narrative as moral corruption; the influencer who uses scientific language to condemn anyone who doesn't share their views. Neopositivist moralism is what happens when scientism becomes a personality.
Example: "He called anyone who questioned the study '
science deniers'—not engaging their arguments, just using '
science' as a moral cudgel. Neopositivist Moralism: the prestige of
science without the rigor."