It is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".
In my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs. If something like "scientism" actually does exist then I have never encountered it.
Here is part of an exchange from another thread - I have brought it here as it was off-topic...
Scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge. Followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything. And deny any existence that cannot be scientifically detected. - John_Mann
So let's talk about that.
Scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
I am interested in examples of ways to know things by means that are not available to the scientific method. I strongly suspect such examples exist but I can't think of any.
One of the problems is that theists keep vacillating on this. If they think any scientific evidence might exist to support their beliefs they are quick to use it. For example I have seen so-called "near death experiences" used as evidence of life after death. This is a scientific claim. It is hypocrisy to resort to accusations of "scientism" when people challenge your evidence.
Followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
It is not "scientism" to ask for evidence for extraordinary claims. It is just common-sense. It is how we avoid being duped by charlatans and fraudsters. If you have evidence for something that you don't think fits the description of scientific evidence then just share it and lets scrutinise it. Again it is difficult to imagine what sort of evidence that could be.
If you want to make grand claims for which you admit there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever then don't be offended when rational people decline to take you seriously. This is not "scientism" it is just healthy skepticism.
And deny any existence that cannot be scientifically detected.
Again, if you can provide any reason to accept that entities exist which cannot be detected scientifically then share those reasons. If it turns out your "reasons" are nothing more than appeals to authority and superstitious dogma then don't resort to childish insults when rational people decline to humour you.
Science is the very best tool we have to understand what is objectively true about reality. If you have other tools then I am keen to hear about it.
I have no interest in links or copy-paste, I can Google like anybody else. I am interested in hearing the personal views of those who frequently resort to this canard in order to avoid the burden of proof. Simple everyday examples would be especially helpful. John_Mann is by no means alone in this.