Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite

[Neo-Scholastic]

NDE's have been thoroughly debunked, and even if they hadn't, they're not evidence of life after death, so don't go there either.

In order for that to be true, there would be a definite known reason for why they occur. A debunker would have to have an adequate explanation and currently, no one knows the necessary and sufficient causes for an NDE.

---

What dressing would like with that salad?

You must be really stupid if you cannot parse such simple sentences.

If a human construct actually maps onto the empirical real world, then there is some real object in or feature of the empirical world capable of being mapped. Otherwise you have an invented set of symbols that only accidentally reflects phenomenal experience, i.e. there is no essential reason for their correspondence. Now that could indeed be the case, but that is the stance that the world is unintelligible.

But those real objects for which our mathematics map so well are not mathematical objects.  The symbol is not the object.

No one is saying that the symbols are objects. Only that there is an essential relationship between mathematical symbols and what those symbols signify.

Better answer: this goes back to all the other 'fortuitous' results of evolution.  The poor mappers have bit the dust.  We are the winner's inheritors.

You say that as if there wasn't a reason why some mapping strategies are better than others. What is the difference between a good map and a bad one if not the degree to which it corresponds to real features and objects in reality?