This is essentially a riff on gnosticism. In a sense, there is a streak of that within science as a social institution, at least among a certain adherents of the cult of scientism. The motive is one of power: secret knowledge is attractive because it promises power over others. It is the same perverse attraction that people have to magic and the occult (libido dominandi). It also promises to make you feel special for knowing what others do not. I don’t think that’s what you want science as a social institution to be about. Science should appear boring to everyone of ill will and only those pure of heart should see its as worth their time.
Btw, when you say that there is “nothing but science to learn”, apart from the strangeness of the phrasing (really, the ultimate aim isn’t to know science as such except when it is the object of study itself, but to know reality and science is construed as a means of knowing reality), I sincerely hope that you don’t mean science in the narrow sense because then your article is by its own criteria worthless and imparts nothing. The claim itself is not scientific.
This is essentially a riff on gnosticism. In a sense, there is a streak of that within science as a social institution, at least among a certain adherents of the cult of scientism. The motive is one of power: secret knowledge is attractive because it promises power over others. It is the same perverse attraction that people have to magic and the occult (libido dominandi). It also promises to make you feel special for knowing what others do not. I don’t think that’s what you want science as a social institution to be about. Science should appear boring to everyone of ill will and only those pure of heart should see its as worth their time.
Btw, when you say that there is “nothing but science to learn”, apart from the strangeness of the phrasing (really, the ultimate aim isn’t to know science as such except when it is the object of study itself, but to know reality and science is construed as a means of knowing reality), I sincerely hope that you don’t mean science in the narrow sense because then your article is by its own criteria worthless and imparts nothing. The claim itself is not scientific.