A reply under the title of "The folly of 'The folly of scientism'" by Professor Jerry Coyne of the University of Chicago, who frequently reads and comments on issues related to the philosophy of science:
". . . . Hughes is an evolutionary biologist with wide-ranging interests, and I’ve really liked some of his papers."
. . . .
"The big problem with Hughes’s essay is that despite his claim that there are other ways of apprehending truth beyond science—ways that involve the three areas of ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology—he gives not a single example of a question that those disciplines have answered."
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/the-folly...
". . . . Hughes is an evolutionary biologist with wide-ranging interests, and I’ve really liked some of his papers."
. . . .
"The big problem with Hughes’s essay is that despite his claim that there are other ways of apprehending truth beyond science—ways that involve the three areas of ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology—he gives not a single example of a question that those disciplines have answered."