I just read a very interesting essay on that topic, written around the Twenties or Thirties. The essay was called "Climates of Thought." I've forgotten the name of the author, but he made reference early in the essay to some thoughts of Bertrand Russell.
The point of the essay is that devotees of the new scientific mindset are both ignorant of and hostile to all modes of intellectual reasoning. Science used to be proud to be known as "natural philosophy," but now they utterly abhor any connection between "science" and "philosophy."
As your interlocutor pointed out in a recent comment, he rejects all thought that passes beyond the scope of "hypothesis, testing, new hypothesis, testing, new hypothesis, etc."
One can recognize that his method has produced some significant results in the field of scientific discovery, while still pointing out the fact that this type of reductionist approach to the intellectual life is inherently dehumanizing.
According to the author of this essay (who was a secular humanist), any possible dialog between St. Thomas Aquinas and a modern scientist was impossible because their respective modes of thinking were so utterly foreign to each other.
One witnesses the author's thesis proven in action here on these evolution threads where the respective disciples of teleological thought and non-telelogical thought are virtually incapable of communication with each other.
[[One witnesses the author’s thesis proven in action here on these evolution threads where the respective disciples of teleological thought and non-telelogical thought are virtually incapable of communication with each other.]]
Oh shut up!
Just kidding!