I love it that people genuinely think technocracy refers to something in the neighborhood of "rule of scientists." Very cute.
Technocracy is semantically closer to something like "evidence-based policy." So people get confused-- scientists are the ones who do all our evidence-handling, interpreting, and so on, right?
Well no, not in a technocracy. "Evidence-based policy" is something that EVERY person worth their salt, especially someone working in an empirical field, should suspect. The reason is that, of course, we aren't dealing with exact material here where evidence could truly rule. What we're dealing with when we talk of "evidence-based policy" is something MUCH more sensitive to the interpretative framework that one employs-- in the sense you can freely pick your conclusions and justify them in a way that appears very serious but can only result from a suppression of proper conceptual analysis.
Aside from justifying policy decisions with the trappings of science and reason, it also provides methods of their implementation. Akin to corporate metrics politicking.
Technocracy is the rule of /r/science and crony capitalists combined.
