What type of explanations are considered valid from a scientistic perspective?

From a scientific perspective, valid explanations are those that are naturalistic in nature. Naturalistic explanations rely on observable phenomena and mechanisms that can be tested through empirical methods, such as experimentation and observation. This approach is fundamental to the scientific method, as it seeks to understand the natural world through evidence-based reasoning and reproducible results.

Naturalistic explanations are grounded in the physical universe and help scientists develop theories that can predict outcomes, understand causes, and generate new knowledge. This aligns with the core principles of science, which prioritize explanations that can be supported or refuted by collected data.

Other types of explanations, such as metaphysical, pseudoscientific, and philosophical, do not adhere strictly to these empirical standards. Metaphysical explanations often deal with abstract concepts that go beyond the physical realm, making them challenging to test or observe. Pseudoscientific claims may appear scientific but lack rigorous methodology or falsifiability, while philosophical explanations may provide insights into ethics, existence, or knowledge but do not aim to produce testable predictions in the manner that scientific inquiries do. Therefore, the naturalistic approach is the cornerstone of valid scientific explanations.