People don't do things like that because they lack understanding of the consequences, they do so because they don't care about the consequences if their other objectives are met.
The weakness of scientism is its its agnosticism; the scientific method can test hypotheses but has nothing to say about the selection of premises. If you (as a hypothetical dictator) think it's perfectly OK to inflict suffering on people you deem inferior, science can be applied to tell you how to make their lives as miserable as possible.
Philosophy has fallen into a social ditch in that it seems mainly to talk about itself and doesn't have the predictive power of science, but I think it's irrational to expect intellectual tools to provide you with answers to ethical questions.
The weakness of scientism is its its agnosticism; the scientific method can test hypotheses but has nothing to say about the selection of premises. If you (as a hypothetical dictator) think it's perfectly OK to inflict suffering on people you deem inferior, science can be applied to tell you how to make their lives as miserable as possible.
Philosophy has fallen into a social ditch in that it seems mainly to talk about itself and doesn't have the predictive power of science, but I think it's irrational to expect intellectual tools to provide you with answers to ethical questions.