In his book Sapiens, Harari suggests that one of the driving causes of the centralization of the state and the market in human culture is science. Since the scientific revolution, humans have been receiving benefits from science such as easier access to better foods and medicines, more leisure time, and overall healthier and longer lives. The state funds scientists and their work often because it believes that scientists can increase the quality of life within its borders or in order to gain more power in other parts of the world. This desire for science and the subsequent funding needed are what really cemented the state and market into human culture. The rise of the state and the market took place nearly at the same time as the scientific revolution, and this is no coincidence.
I think that as we consider the future, or the end, of humanity that historians should act as a guiding force for the ethical considerations of the use of science and social policy. Being able to look back on the events of the past and evaluate the conditions that caused them, as well as the consequences of them, is essential in evaluating the ethical and tangible consequences of science and policy today. I am not saying that historians should be the sole decider on which sciences and policies humanity gets to use and employ, but I am suggesting that they could provide valuable insight as to the effects of these and that their thoughts and opinions should be considered carefully.