Why anti scientific ? His theory is based on a lot of anthropological observations. He elaborates a very robust hypothesis with rigorous reasoning and comes up

Why anti scientific ? His theory is based on a lot of anthropological observations. He elaborates a very robust hypothesis with rigorous reasoning and comes up with a brilliant/thought-provoking and yet simple theory (so much more simple & elegant than freudian theory) on the structural role of religion, rituals and sacrifice in human societies. Overall you don't need to agree on everything he says or consider it as scientific ! Scientific proof anyway in human matters are hardly testable, subject to contradiction and ideological bias. So criticizing him because of a lack of scientific rigor is just bashing in an open door. However I don't know much about Paul Ricoeur, so I'd love to know what you consider great about his work.