Oh, in terms of the original post's thesis:
Scientists get dogmatic all of the time -- it is (IMO, as a scientist) the kiss of death for a scientist when he/she/they do, too.
And (again, IMO), the worst thing a scientist can do is think he/she/they know all there is to know in their discipline. Again, the kiss of death (IMO) for an effective scientist.
The Newtonian view of the universe fit (and still fits) much of human experience more than adequately well. There were just a couple of loose ends... but a true revolution in physics was tied to sussing out what was goin' on with those loose ends.
Science is not a thing - it is a philosophy; a way of thinking about/approaching
things.
In the past decade or so, the word (more to the point, the concept) has been ever-more mis-applied (again, IMO).
E.g., I
throw up in my mouth cringe a little (sometimes a lot) every time I hear the words
settled science on broadcast media.
I've posted this before, but I post it again. I feel bad for the generation of students I teach every fall in Boston -- they get all of the modern, trendy, state-of-the-art fluff, but I am not sure they have much of a grasp of the fundamental
meat of experimental science. Not
how to do it, but
why we approach things the way we do. I certainly try to at least dip their toes in it.