On the contrary, I think it's extremely useful for two enormous reasons: 1) This recognition that our models are not the truth and can (should) be frequently q

On the contrary, I think it's extremely useful for two enormous reasons: 1) This recognition that our models are not the truth and can (should) be frequently questioned and rejected fundamentally underpins skeptical inquiry. Newton believed he was discovering fundamental Laws, the clockwork that runs the universe. Einstein proved this to be fallacious, and now we live uneasily with the knowledge that Einstein's descriptions are "false" as well. 2) Our models are not only responsible to "reality", they are also responsible to political, social, economic demands. Who, what, and how we observe are choices we make that shape the nature of our reality (that is, our view of "the real world", which is the only thing ever available to us - the real world is always inaccessible). It behooves us to be aware of this intrusion. Science is not a pristine garden undisturbed by anything other than "fact" - fact itself is polluted by its habitat, the human mind. The history of science is littered with horrors that resulted from the conviction that our current dogmas are true and that our current forms of knowledge the best.