No, you are getting there. But remember there is a difference. There is science and there is scientism. They are not the same.
But some of those, who do understand science, don't understand when they do scientism. Yet others do understand the limit. You are the second kind.
What you are learning, is of limited usage and you can do with out it. But once you have learned it, you can spot when some humans imbue science with a value system, it can't do.
So what is the value of this? Well, as you, that is your problem. In general you are learning a corner of some aspects of social constructivism, namely that all knowledge is embedded in a social setting and you always look for the power, morality, utility and so on attached to the words.
Now this is maybe not Jim's point, but I think I get. It is a kind of idealism, namely to learn to see what is really about. That all that matters, is that it matters to humans. I.e. a better world and respect and love for humans and nature.
So where to start? Well, this is one place. To get some humans to understand that science is being misused for ideology. Remember again the difference between science and scientism. But of course it doesn't tackle dogmatic religion.
But scientism and dogmatic religion are the 2 sides of the same coin. In effect, they are about the same. To claim a knowledge, that is not there and then use it to judge humans with an authority, that is not there.