The discussion of scientism is not always clear from the realm of philosophers. To me darwinism is a brand of scientism, but even academic critics of scientism wouldn’t support this. From the viewpoint of WHEE the emergence of scientism is almost obvious: a dialectical field or spread (‘dialectic’ meaning here the counterpoint display of opposites in an historical context, e.g. the Enlightenment and the Romantic movement, not really opposites, but…) that is very balanced is suddenly bypassed with a subset of a larger whole. To evade jargon and get specific we can see how the early modern transition with its strong, almost overwhelming, scientific revolution emerged in a field of parallel counterpoints but overwhelmed everything and took center stage thereafter. And this resulted often in very shallow interpretations of social or psychological phenomena as the attempt to create a universal science generated ad hoc theories in the manner of ‘scientism’.