predict and control

Any sufficiently developed theory that seeks to explain and predict phenomena will eventually cross the boundary from prediction to control.

You don't get nuclear bombs without first developing nuclear physics. You don't get CRISPR without the study of genetics. And you definitely don't get behavioral modification unless you first spend a couple of decades researching behavioral science.

Humans have a natural inclination to master their surroundings, to "have dominion ... over the earth" (Gen 1:26-28). We first seek to explain why things happen, and then we try to control the outcome, to make things happen in a way that benefits us.

There is a sinister aspect to this inclination when we turn our attention away from the natural world to the realm of human affairs. In physics, we've moved from predicting the behavior of matter in the aggregate to predicting the behavior of individual atoms, which has made us infinitely more powerful. The social sciences have undergone a similar shift from understanding human societies to understanding individual human behavior in the form of psychology. The inevitable result is a force multiplier effect on our ability to nudge, influence, or manipulate our fellow humans into doing our bidding. This instrumental mindset toward fellow humans is shifting the balance of power towards ever greater inequality.

We will never be satisfied with knowing why things are the way they are. Few among us have the temperament appropriate for the ascetic life, content in our enlightened caves with the knowledge of the workings of our universe. Indeed, even caves were eventually replaced by monasteries, which were built with stone mined from quarries or trees felled from forests. We just need to be mindful that the acquisitive, instrumental aspect of our nature comes at the cost of our contemplative inclination, and it is consuming us.