The proper subject for science

The New York Times has a slightly hostile interview with Daniel Dennett today (no link since NYT puts everything behind a paywall after 5 days; Kottke's the source). Dennett answers with admirable style a question a lot of scientists have faced. After he states there is no soul and that the brain is neurones all the way down, the interviewer says, "That strikes me as a very reductive and uninteresting approach to religious feeling." Dennett remarks that love can be studied scientifically too.

But what's the point of that? Wouldn't it be more worthwhile to spend your time and research money looking for a cure for AIDS?

How about if we study hatred and fear? Don't you think that would be worthwhile?

Save us from those who would decide on our behalf--and with the best of intentions--what is good, right or appropriate!