It's an analogy. All communication is ultimately circular, and we can never be sure that we understand the terms the same way as the other party. Still, people

It's an analogy. All communication is ultimately circular, and we can never be sure that we understand the terms the same way as the other party. Still, people often seem to be able to communicate. Similarly, scientific method cannot discover the underlying principles or explain the nature. It can only rule out principles and explanations. Regardless, science seems to come up with principles and explanations all the time. And that's because scientific method is not science. It's a theoretical model for a subset of (often ritualized) activities within science. Actual science is more than that. It can do things scientific method cannot, because it's less focused on philosophical ideas such as absolute truth or provable facts. In my experience, scientific method is like a picture of an elephant drawn from a written description. Drawn by someone who has never seen the animal or a picture of it, and who has no idea what kind of an animal it is. There are some recognizable elements, but it definitely does not look like the real thing.