This isn't really a metaphor or an analogy. Modern scientific leaders and religious leaders both act as liaisons between the public and knowledge. Scientists tend to produce a lot more useful knowledge, but the issues faced by both are the same. It's obvious they both end up developing similar patterns for resolving communication issues.

The parent noticed this similarity because both are in the same business.

I said 'Not a criticism, just interesting' in the hopes of emphasizing that I was making an observation, not an argument.

Sorry I failed to communicate that more clearly!

That said, there is something to be said for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy

I view your observation as interesting and worth making, and I also believe there's an implicit argument there against that line of thinking.

The word "perfect" is problematic to me. It's ascribed to God to contrast with man, as most of us would agree that nothing we do is perfect. Using it implies the same religious status of being above man's foibles.

I like the word "useful" here, or "anti-fragile" in the original comment.

Further, I like defining context. Useful in what class of problems? For I don't think the scientific method is regarded as particularly useful in all domains. Consciousness and the subjective are valid realms of human experience worth dedicated inquiry, for which the scientific method seems woefully lacking.