My suspicion is that we teach two important philosophies: 1) Scientific method is based on doubt 2) Self-confidence is a muscle to be exercised and developed with not enough emphasis on the fact that not all doubts are created equal. Scientific advancement is presented as a chain of identical links, from "fire" to "Large Hadron Collider" with the emphasis on exploration of the unknown as the cause of progress. However, nobody points out that a much larger body of expertise is necessary to snipe at String Theory in 2014 than was required to disprove the four humors in the Enlightenment. That, after all, might damage the fragile young egos into thinking that everything worth discovering has been discovered. It's become harder and harder to say "you're wrong" in a classroom, but sometimes ideas are wrong.Conflating the science and philosophy is an all too common mistake. I wish I knew where the failure lay.