>Latin was necessary for a professional career, but science was not. With the British industrial revolution, science was almost mandatory. >religious thought

>Latin was necessary for a professional career, but science was not. With the British industrial revolution, science was almost mandatory. >religious thought became much less central, Well, guess why. Once you get a logical foundation on how the Universe behaves, all of the tribalist, messianic babble goes down the sink. The problem with Humanities/Arts is that they love being hideous and fancy instead of being just fine with any truth we found. No metter which side of Politics you choose; they love having biases like nothing so their prejudices stay on top of the facts. Look what happened with Galileo, or the Google guy stating that, yes, there are differences on which careers men and women choose _on average_, (hormones rule us a lot), and then most 'woke people' began a witch hunt. These people forgot to extrapolate that the more social it's a society, with granted rights, (and nurturing/caring rights/aids), the less the differences will happen on a future. And, yes, education and context plays a huge rule. We are like computers, having civilized 'software'(evolved social rules, modern law, 'weird' non-animal customs...) but with outdated hardware (Neolithic era genetics and hormones). That will change over millenia, for sure. Science, OTOH, tries to kill any bias since the beginning.