Peer review, under the zealot conceptualization, is a committee of people advising other readers to take the committee’s word for it.

More honestly, scientists must be independently literate beyond what peer reviewers endorse, both because peer reviewers cannot cover every report ever produced and also because peer reviewers sometimes get it wrong.

Every scientific reader must function autonomously, engaging critically and thoughtfully with the intellectual material they consume. Maybe a child would expect everything to be curated for them by tastemakers and then handed over on a silver platter, but lazy consumption is not the purpose of being a scientist. Scientists are meant to participate actively in the scientific process, not to merely receive wisdom from others.