On the one hand, yeah, SF authors grind them axes. On the other hand, SF has been dealing with the what-if question of Turing AI and the boundaries of the definition of human and the social implications of progress in ways that I think we benefit from. Many of those stories don't feel like axe-grinding.

Even if you look at, say, ST and Roddenberry's blind optimism and humanism, the show did ask some awfully pertinent questions about race, at a time when race was a much less decided issue than it is now. I think we sort of have to take our lumps, you know? No author- unless we already agree with them- is going to present both insightful questions and no biases/assumptions in how they present them.