Ever helpful, I'll try to bring Kittamaru up to speed. Here's MR's original post in this thread (highlighting by me):
Are values embedded within science and implicit in scientific practice? What justifies our confidence that these values, assuming that they exist, are the ones best suited to serve as the compass that gives history and 'progress' their meaning, direction and goal?
Paddoboy, the board's most outspoken defender of scientism, stoutly rose to the challenge:
If I was going to nit-pick, I could point out that some of that seems to be historically simplistic and inaccurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_thesis
MR replied by saying:
MR clearly intended his reference to astronomy as a reference to pure research that doesn't have any obvious technology pay-off in making human lives easier and more comfortable. (Assuming that's the proper direction of progress.) Star surveys have revealed that most of the stars in the Sun's vicinity are M-class red dwarfs, knowledge that doesn't seem to be necessary to prevent humanity from plunging into a new 'dark-age'.
So all of this arguing about GPS satellites and weather forcasting looks like a textbook example of
(to steal Kittamaru's words)
"a non sequitur at best, but seems more likely to be a case of ignoratio elenchi..."