we have no reason to believe science is or has ever been linear, homogenous, rational, or inevitable. what scientists do also hardly ever mirrors our reductive, idealized statistical models. we need to know exactly what purpose those idealizations are meant to serve and use them in that capacity.

Moreover, pruning the list to include only "high quality" or "important" books won't help, because the process is fractal; the reduced list will have the same properties,
and you'll only feel worse.

My provokation of this matter is that the fascist right actually beat civil society and academia to the punch in truly internalizing the lesson that all systems, information, data are biased, that neutrality and objectivity aren't real; and then put this knowledge into practice for social control

Social means taking other(s) into account and modifying own behavior accordingly. They're social-- they're heavily embedded in a way of thinking very hard to get into and which makes shifting perspective very difficult, even punishable. That's what being social means for them.

No, that's for logicians