The Case for Atheism

[Neo-Scholastic]

But if exclusion of those principals makes good for science, why would it impoverish life? After all, science is the study of the natural.

A purely scientific description of a tree would include only quantifiable facts: weight, material composition, number of leaves, etc. Any references to tree qualities would not be strictly scientific: reference to uses, symbolic associations and signification, sensable qualities. That doesn't even mention the pre-scientific ability to classify things and events with common features as identical.

Whats good for science is good for life.

Like the development of nuclear weapons? Science, both as a means of inquiry and its conclusions, does not exist in a vacuum. Science falls within a larger context, a world of values and meaning, even if those values and meanings are provisional.

And I have to throw the bullshit flag on "intellectual honesty." You may have an honest opinion, but that doesn't exclude others from also honestly holding their contrary opinion.