“David Goodstein, a physicist at Cal Tech, notes that science has been growing nearly exponentially for centuries and that it cannot continue such growth — because then everybody on the planet would have to be a scientist, and then the growth would have to stop.” – Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

At first, this passage made me chuckle. But it got me to thinking: why would it be bad for us all to be scientists? With AI automation of many industries coming in the next decade, it’s probably not a bad idea for STEM to become the primary driver of human enterprise, is it?

Why shouldn’t everyone be a scientist, in some way? Especially if we’re defining “scientist” not by a lab coat or a university title, but as someone who’s trained in curiosity, skepticism, method, and adaptation. Frankly, these are survival skills for the AI-saturated, climate-complicated, post-truth future we’re tumbling into.

If Everyone Were a Scientist (At Heart)

1. We’d ask better questions.

2. We’d trust process over personality.

3. We’d treat being wrong as progress, not shame.

4. We’d prize replicable truth over viral “vibes.”

Honestly, that sounds like a world where more people could think their way out of destructive ideologies, market manipulation, and cults of personality. Imagine that.

As AI swallows rote labor, bureaucracy, and even a good chunk of knowledge work, what’s left? Strictly human skills: creative inquiry, pattern recognition, empirical intuition, systems thinking. Science—not as a job, but as a mindset—becomes one of the few “industries” that remains deeply human. Even if models like ChatGPT can assist with hypotheses or data crunching, they don’t (and can’t) replace wonder. And they sure as hell don’t replace ethical reasoning, which any good science must eventually confront.

Of course, our lead-in quote does hint at something quietly true: Exponential growth—of anything—can’t continue forever. Not even science, nor even progress. There’s a saturation point. Not everyone needs to be a professional researcher. But if everyone had a scientific literacy baseline and a flexible philosophical framework (such as these Obscure Curiosities), we’d be in far less danger of letting infotainment drive policy while the planet burns in the background.

So maybe the endgame isn’t: “Everyone becomes a scientist.” But more like: “Everyone becomes scientific enough to live wisely, and artistic enough to make life worth living.” That’s the kind of future I can happily forward to, a modern human Renaissance that uses technology and science proactively. It’s what Carl Sagan dreamed of thirty years ago; that dream hasn’t yet been realized, of course. Not yet, at least.