Taboo knowledge

Is knowledge a tool, like a hammer or a weapon, to do good or evil according to the will of those who wield it, or is there an inherent morality to it making some topics taboo? Many people feel that there are genres or fields of knowledge which should not be explored, or in other words that should be taboo. Oftentimes, knowledge appears to threaten religion, philosophies, and personal beliefs or values, and therefore is suppressed from investigation. Knowledges sometimes appears to offer more harm than value, and therefore is deemed to merit controls or restrictions, but sitting on the table of the mind like a book, it has no power of itself.

When knowledge (even here on Wikipedia through reversions) appears to challenge ideas or agendas, people will attempt to destroy (burn books) such as taboo knowledge in defense of their ideologies with whatever opportunities present themselves, even sometimes here on Wikipedia whether by vandalism or by wrongly citing NPOV or original research without justification. "...There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches. Every minority, be it Baptist/Unitarian, Irish/Italian/Octogenarian/Zan Buddhist, Zionist/Seventh-day Adventist, Women's Lib/ Republican, Mattachine/FourSquareGospel feels it has the will, the right, the duty to douse the kerosene, light the fuse. Every dimwit editor who sees himself as the source of all dreary blanc-mange plain porridge unleavened literature, licks his guillotine and eyes the neck of any author who dares to speak above a whisper or write above a nursery rhyme...." - Ray Bradbury