![christian-fregnan-426703.jpg](https://steemitimages.com/DQmWUJ79L9LmMoiy2szU6TiMfRHhoNXJv5nejUrf8CJNGQG/christian-fregnan-426703.jpg)

There's a tendency to put science on a pedestal, even sometimes as a replacement for religion, due to the massive technological developments in recent history. Some prominent 20th century thinkers have referred to a phenomenon called *scientism*, which basically means science should be the standard for all realms of knowledge. On the surface this seems pretty reasonable as the scientific method is an objective inquiry concerned with using evidence garnered through experiments to validate claims.

Unless you've been isolated from society, it's obvious how science has paved the foundation of technology giving civilization all these gadgets and new ways of doing things we couldn't imagine living without. The advancements in the fields of medicine and engineering among others, vastly surpass anything the moralists have attempted, so as a collective we tend to give more credence towards science and see it as the machine of progress.

**So far nature has been leveraged effectively, but what about human nature?**

The tyrants, social engineers, central planners, controllers, meddlers, and anyone else who think they know better than the rest can be considered scientists of man. For whatever reason these types are unsatisfied by human nature and try to impose their will as the scientists have successfully done with the physical environment. Although it's important to recognize that there's a crucial difference between these two—the scientist of man deals with humans which by their very nature can't be isolated and grouped like the varieties of elements physicists or chemists work under.

Man's power over nature has seen tremendous advancements, it's been increasingly accelerating since the industrial revolution to the current digital age. Perhaps there is a sense of resentment by the ruling class in how man's power over nature continually becomes successful, while dealings with humans don't seem to change. Interestingly, with each victory over nature it usually follows a subsequent desire to master humanity. The 20th century brought mass movements and attempts at ideological mastery of humanity brought out by political collectivism as well as the sophistication of propaganda methods.

The common underlying theme with all of this, is a general relentless drive to manipulate man and control human nature. The fetish of science has led to an atmosphere of using objective discovery for things that can't be discovered but can only come about through mental creation; in other words, you cant find distinguishing properties like you would with chemicals in a lab, in individuals, who at end of the day are subjective entities and will never fully be exactly the same as anybody else.

There is something to think about though, a practical idea especially for those concerned with individual freedom. Those in the field of science are well aware that exceptions invalidate statistics, scientific rules, and theories; and if they are found, they must be handled or completely removed. In human affairs, the dissenter is in the same category, they are essentially rebels of absolute power and will always exist as it's in the nature of things to do so.

[img src](https://unsplash.com/@christianfregnan)