And my contention is that you would have been right a half-century ago, but it is no longer true, and attacking science, scientists, or the role either plays in society is no more helpful than is attacking Germany nowadays in order to stem the rise of authoritarianism.

I do not think you've make the link you need to between objectivity (i.e. perceiving things how they are) and objectification (i.e. perceiving things as to have value only by how they can be exploited).

This is the kind of linguistic move that I was talking about before. Yes, because the words have related origins and structure, there is a very weak linguistic inference from objectivity to objectification (and objection). But, no, that isn't the role science is playing in society any longer. Science objectively breaks us out of our careless objectification of nature and each other, where we assume that things we do not know are simple and don't matter, by showing us that our presumptions are flawed.

We, and the natural world, were always robots (in the sense that it's mechanism all the way down), and were always lovely (in that we have affinity for each other and nature). Science just tells us that, indeed, we're lovely robots, instead leaving us to be confused about one or both.