A Silent War Between Humanists and Scientists?

Went to see Flip Phillips' talk this evening about how he became... well, how he combined interests in music, architecture, animation, and science into a singular career and found a path that let him study what he loves.

Flip postulated that there are ongoing arguments between the ideological bases of humanism and science. I found this fascinating because I've spent a lot of time this semester studying humanism only to find that for every layer I uncover, another more esoteric one appears.

Humanism seems to abhor a definition. Science, ignoring the issue, dedicates itself to knowledge building via the scientific method. Can one of these possibly be right, though? Obviously the answer is that there is common ground, but I would like to push back and suggest this rift represents a glitch, rather than an argument. Scientists should be humanists, and humanists should be scientists. So what's wrong?

Yesterday, my friend Mimi offhandedly remarked that science is "God's logic-" regardless of the accuracy of this claim, I thought it made an interesting point- that there are multiple angles to approach ideas from, and that perhaps there really is a silent war on between those who leave the figuring up to God, and those who demand that they have ultimate authority over all knowledge entering their heads.

More to come on this issue, but until then I've asked Flip for a meeting where I'll get his perspective on these tricky things called ideas.