You say our problems stem from divergent interests, but yet what he speaks to here is our ability to observe objective truths, and to build our solutions on tho

You say our problems stem from divergent interests, but yet what he speaks to here is our ability to observe objective truths, and to build our solutions on those. Our current system has no interest in building or finding solutions that help everyone, but instead in pushing their own agendas in the assumption that once "we" win, "they" will have to admit how right we were! He's saying that our subjective opinions of what the facts SHOULD be (often our very notion of what is in our best interest,) should be investigated until we come to an objective reality of what is in our best interests. He's saying science provides those answers if we can get beyond ourselves. He says we should not elect people only to chastise them for being both too smart, or too dumb. How, from that, do you get "he's saying we're dumb!" He's not saying someone is dumb, and someone is smart. He's saying as a scientist, it's his job to hunt for objective truths, and that as an educator, he seeks to teach everyone to find those truths. Should scientists and educators not... Educate and seek objective truths? Isn't that kind of the point in those professions? What's arrogant about that? What's EXTREMELY arrogant about that?