In the present analogy, the trait undergoing selection is an individual's overall understanding of science. The value currently favored is a mediocre understanding of science. Several factors result in the elimination of extreme values for this trait.

On the lower end of the curve, complete ignorance of science is eliminated by our current educational practices. In this age of media and mass communications, a total lack of scientific knowledge is increasingly rare. Many public schools have implemented excellent science programs that contribute greatly to scientific literacy. Even in places where significant portions of the population reject wide swaths of scientific knowledge, a certain value is still assigned to science. This is likely due to the recognition that the use of the scientific method has led to advancements in agriculture, technology, and medicine that have greatly improved our overall standard of living.

On the upper end of the curve, a full understanding of science is eliminated by two major factors.

First, scientific concepts can be difficult to grasp. Our world is incredibly complex and figuring out how it works requires a significant effort. In addition, scientific discoveries sometimes contradict common sense and everyday experience. Due to the difficult and non-intuitive nature of some scientific explanations, many people choose to adopt simpler explanations for natural phenomena. This natural human tendency can be quite challenging to overcome. In the famous words of the late Richard Feynman, "Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves."

Second, many of our current educational practices help to eliminate a full understanding of science by de-emphasizing, omitting, or even openly denigrating certain topics due to their "controversial" nature. Under such conditions, a sort of negative feedback loop may be established where efforts to improve science education are rejected by people who, due to their own lack of scientific knowledge, reject such efforts because of a perceived threat to their personal beliefs.

In nature, stabilizing selection ends when environmental factors change so that the conditions no longer favor the average value of the trait. One possible outcome of such a change is the splitting of the population into two separate groups through a process known as disruptive selection. Another possible outcome is directional selection, in which the average value for the trait continuously shifts in one direction.

Obviously, the most desirable outcome in the present analogy would be directional selection towards a fuller understanding of science. This should be the goal of anyone interested in the continued advancement of science. Therefore, our efforts must be focused on identifying the environmental conditions that will favor a full understanding of science.