We could easily pull up dozens of examples of spurious, dull or absurd results and claims from science. There are interesting things to be learned from philosop

We could easily pull up dozens of examples of spurious, dull or absurd results and claims from science. There are interesting things to be learned from philosophy even if some of it is dumb. It's especially important to address the claims of science to be a perfect method of knowledge; in the absence of religious justifications for human activity science has been set up as a valid replacement and its important to examine its right to the throne. We have a long history of attempts at scientific decision making that claims an objectivity it ought not to have (see: forced sterilizations, eugenics, mass medication and medicalization of human behavior) and tremendous consequence resulting from this sort of claim (environmental catastrophe, for example). If science is going to intrude on the domain of politics, of deciding what is human and who should be considered human, we seriously need to challenge the assumption of objective knowledge and think about science's fundamental dependence on metaphysical constructs. Easy to ignore if you are Feynman at the top of this pyramid, but scientific authority is just authority; it has to be accountable to something or it is going to produce monsters. As the article states, this exploration can only occur from outside science; we can't answer claims about its validity or access to truth from within science.