I upvoted the first 2 para's of this reply. Now, as to this old saw: >there is no disinterested search for truth In studying the history of science, I've seen

I upvoted the first 2 para's of this reply. Now, as to this old saw: >there is no disinterested search for truth In studying the history of science, I've seen that: what the word 'scientist' means has changed a great deal in the past two centuries (since the more generalist 'natural philosophers'). Also that: for most of that time it has never been a disinterested search (let alone 'for truth' ... a word as undefinable as 'god'). Prime example: The existence of rocks falling from the sky was rejected by the faithful simply because Newton said space is -empty-. (There are hundreds more salient examples.) The rise of specializations is like the rise of Guilds; inevitable for multiple practical reasons. (Recently I tried to read a paper on Paleoneurobiology. Nope, not going there.)