Whats the point of modern science?

[Angrboda]

I am merely observing what I see as a trend. I find it concerning. That's as far as I have got.

I've come to the conclusion that truth is the property of groups. Even if an individual could grasp things on their own, they have no reliable way of discriminating between those things they know from those things they merely think they know. So perhaps we're already there, in a sense, out of necessity. However, I think it's a mistake to conclude that it's a stalemate, that both priesthoods speak with equivalent authority, because they don't. If someone tells you a ( pastor | scientist ) says X, you'll have very different levels of credulity depending on which. And it doesn't matter that for a small minority of the population, religious truth and scientific truth are on a par, because they will always be the minority and never control the overall direction of society. Yes, you run the risk of a corrupt priesthood, in science as elsewhere, but I don't think the alternative, hoping for an educated populace, is realistic or even obtainable. It's said that Newton was the last true expert in all fields of science; that kind of global mastery is simply not possible any longer.

In short, the problem is not that both sides will have equal credibility because both are quoting authorities; they won't, and they don't, in general. The problem is ensuring the the priesthood, whether of God or of science, is reliable and trustworthy. There's a reason a televangelist doesn't have the same credibility as a scientist, and while part of that reason is based on popular myth about science, I don't know that this ultimately matters so long as the most reliable priesthood comes out on top in the most cases.