You contradict yourself.

It is not a contradiction in context.

We are taught to question the narrative in the minutia.

We are taught to trust the overarching narrative.

Because we are taught to question the narrative in the minutia, this leads to all the same skills required to question the larger narrative (the dogma). It is because we receive years of training to question the ongoing narrative, and taught to use genuine critical thinking within that scope, that we require extra training to not question the dogma.

For the most part this extra training is just an extra dose of the same mind control techniques that control the larger population. For example, no one wants to be a conspiracy theorist. It's the worst thing a person can be. If you are one, you will be hated by all. In science, in addition to that motivation, you also don't want to be a crackpot, or a quack, etc. You also won't receive funding for "fringe" science, and thus won't "waste your time" looking into those ideas that others have bravely investigated on their own dime (or DARPA's).

The thoughts are controlled so strictly, with multiple layers of Matrix self-correction (economic, social, moral, etc.) that the path of least resistance is to adhere strictly to the dogma.

But the training we receive is exactly the training to see outside of The Matrix, thus the requirement for extra controls, and the constant pushing of the dogma from cradle to grave for those in the sciences.

You contradict yourself.

It is not a contradiction in context.

We are taught to question the narrative in the minutia.

We are taught to trust the overarching narrative.

Because we are taught to question the narrative in the minutia, this leads to all the same skills required to question the larger narrative (the dogma). It is because we receive years of training to question the ongoing narrative, and use critical thinking within that scope, that we require extra training to not question the dogma.

For the most part this extra training is just an extra dose of the same mind control techniques that control the larger population. For example, no one wants to be a conspiracy theorist. It's the worst thing a person can be. If you are one, you will be hated by all. In science, in addition to that motivation, you also don't want to be a crackpot, or a quack, etc. You also won't receive funding for "fringe" science, and thus won't "waste your time" looking into those ideas that others have bravely investigated on their own dime (or DARPA's).

The thoughts are controlled so strictly, with multiple layers of Matrix self-correction (economic, social, moral, etc.) that the path of least resistance is to adhere strictly to the dogma.

But the training we receive is exactly the training to see outside of The Matrix, thus the requirement for extra controls, and the constant pushing of the dogma from cradle to grave for those in the sciences.

You contradict yourself.

It is not a contradiction in context.

We are taught to question the narrative in the minutia.

We are taught to trust the overarching narrative.

Because we are taught to question the narrative in the minutia, this leads to all the same skills required to question the larger narrative (the dogma). It is because we receive years of training to question the ongoing narrative, and use critical thinking within that scope, that we require extra training to not question the dogma.

For the most part this extra training is just an extra dose of the same mind control techniques that control the larger population. For example, no one wants to be a conspiracy theorist. It's the worst thing a person can be. If you are one, you will be hated by all. In science you don't want to be a crackpot, or a quack, etc. You also won't receive funding for "fringe" science, and thus won't "waste your time" looking into those ideas that others have bravely investigated on their own dime (or DARPA's).

The thoughts are controlled so strictly, with multiple layers of Matrix self-correction (economic, social, moral, etc.) that the path of least resistance is to adhere strictly to the dogma.

But the training we receive is exactly the training to see outside of The Matrix, thus the requirement for extra controls, and the constant pushing of the dogma from cradle to grave for those in the sciences.

You contradict yourself.

It is not a contradiction in context.

We are taught to question the narrative in the minutia.

We are taught to trust the overarching narrative.

Because we are taught to question the narrative in the minutia, this leads to all the same skills required to question the larger narrative (the dogma). It is because we receive years of training to question the ongoing narrative, and use critical thinking within that scope, that we require extra training to not question the dogma.