[kijin]

> Implicit in this statement is that "figur[ing] out what the world looks like" -- and then accepting that status quo -- is, or ought to be, the goal of all people.

The article is from lesswrong.com, where everyone focuses very much on figuring out facts, and less so on most of the other things that matter in life. In addition, by "facts" or "what the world looks like" they mean scientifically verifiable facts first and foremost. I don't think a lot of people would have a problem with the "status quo" if by that phrase you meant F=ma or E=mc^2.

In fact, I would say that the article (and the lesswrong.com community as a whole) subscribes to a radically progressive point of view, where any and every social institution (and our emotional attachments to them) should be subjected to rigorous scrutiny based on facts. The author will probably take issue with your assumption -- "assuming one has an understanding of the status quo" -- since, in his/her opinion, whether or not you actually have an understanding of facts is exactly what we're trying to figure out in the first place.

I'm not sure whether having such a hyper-critical point of view is actually better than having a conservative bias -- after all, there are other things that matter in life -- but in any case I think you missed the context.