in these last years of the second millennium, science is under attack on many fronts. Religious conservatives accuse scientists of blind faith in the dogma of Darwinism; New Age thinkers charge that the naturalistic materialism of science is a superstition that must be abandoned if we are to make progress; feminists question the phallocentric nature of the entire Western intellectual tradition, including science; nonwhites question the Eurocentric nature of science; and postmodernists would reject everything about it, if only the concept of rejection were not itself infected with Western intellectual bias. Even many ordinary people have a modicum of contempt for science, blaming it for the production of a great deal of the mess in which we find ourselves. The more conservative critics regard science the way the twenty- fourth century Federation regards the Klingon Empire--as an ally with whom you have an uneasy truce, but whose attempts at expansion require vigilance. The more radical regard science as they would the Borg--any involvement with it will end with your assimilation.
Insofar as there is a coherent antiscience thesis that these groups have in common, it is in two parts. First, all parties are of the view that science necessarily is limited in scope. Second, there is a deep suspicion that somehow science has everyone