I came across this in my reading the other day, and it seems to confirm your insight:
Today's science has achieved remarkable successes and is an indispensable aspect of humanity. Without science, there can be no progress. Yet, science cannot explain, it is not equipped to explain anything that is not subject to algorithmic rules, to ordinary mathematical descriptions, or in the case of physical systems, partial differential equations. It cannot explain the qualitative aspects of reality. Present science cannot completely explain not only living processes in large aggregates of cells, organisms, etc., or what we may term holistic organizations (it certainly has had great success to account for molecular biochemical processes), but also noetic aspects of reality, mind and consciousness. It cannot explain or even account for the experiences of art, for the entire experience of human life, driven by the emotional levels of the psyche. And certainly it has little to say about the deep underlying nature of the cosmos, or reality, in general.... We believe that present-day science needs to be extended beyond its present limits and it needs a new ontological model of reality, what we term here the science of wholeness. — Menas Kafatos, "The Science of Wholeness," in Analectica Husserliana: The Yearbook of Phenomenological Research, Volume CVII — Astronomy and Civilization in the New Enlightenment, 2011, A-T Tymieniecka and A. Grandpierre, eds.Kafatos wrote a wonderful book, coauthored with Robert Nadeau, The Non-Local Universe. Highly recommended!
It will be argued that it is not science's business to deal with the qualitative aspects of reality. But if one is trying to understand the Universe in toto, and man's place in it (not to mention the emergence of life and mind), one cannot leave them out. To attempt to do so is a kind of falsification of reality.
Thank you for writing, freerepublicchat!