❖ Summary
- Blind trust in scientific knowledge ignores the deep disagreements among experts in social sciences.
- Policy-making bodies selectively implement one school of thought, turning entire populations into experimental subjects.
- Experts are not held accountable for their failures; their errors are excused as intellectual misjudgments.
- The system’s conquering power instills the belief that there is no alternative, making its foundation immune to critique.
❖ Blind Trust in Scientific Knowledge
Today’s world witnesses a dangerous over-reliance on science and social science as infallible, final authorities. It is assumed that scientific experts possess definitive solutions, free of disagreement.
Educated individuals, under this influence, place unquestioning trust in scientific authorities, especially for solving economic, political, and social problems.
❖ Disagreement Among Experts and Competing Theories
This trust is misplaced and arises from ignorance of the nature of scientific inquiry. In reality, social sciences lack consensus. Various schools of thought diverge on even the most basic principles.
In economics, for instance:
- Classical, Keynesian, Neoclassical, and Marxist schools hold opposing assumptions and conclusions.
- There is no agreement on causes of economic crises or their solutions.
This diversity implies that experts can never reach a unified answer.
❖ Policy Experiments and Human Cost
Despite these divisions, governments and institutions adopt one theory and enforce it through policy, turning entire societies into laboratories.
If a policy fails, it’s replaced without any accountability.
If it succeeds, credit goes to the experts — but the human cost of failure is ignored.
❖ Lack of Accountability and Intellectual Dishonesty
Failures of these policies are not scrutinized. Instead:
- They are labeled as “ijtihādī mistakes” or natural miscalculations.
- Experts face no consequences, even when their errors impact millions.
- Often, such experts continue to benefit financially and professionally, while the public bears the loss.
The promise of future success is always held out — without any guarantee or responsibility.
❖ The System’s Conquering Power and Discourse Control
This occurs under the influence of the system’s “conquering power” — a psychological and intellectual force that convinces people that the current system is unchallengeable.
Those who raise doubts are either ignored or marginalized.
This epistemic authoritarianism restricts genuine debate and alternative thinking.
❖ Consequences and Reality
Such blind trust in experts leads to:
- Overlooking internal contradictions and disagreements within disciplines.
- Believing that policy is always guided by settled truth, rather than by experimentation and bias.
- Ignoring the fact that millions suffer, yet no one is held responsible — the system remains untouchable.
✿ Summary
❶ Social sciences are not unified disciplines — experts often disagree fundamentally.
❷ Policy-makers experiment on human lives by adopting one school of thought, often without accountability.
❸ Expert failures are excused, and the public pays the price.
❹ The system reinforces blind trust and suppresses critique, turning its flaws into permanent features.
❺ This blind faith is dangerous, as it destroys lives while protecting those responsible for its errors.
