The phrase I’ve heard is “epistemically privileged.” And deservedly because from a standpoint of pure ethics, “science” has done way more good than damage than competing ways of looking at the world.

But let’s say someone asks you how a car works. You go into a bit about the internal combustion engine. You explain how little explosions make pistons go. They ask you about these explosions, so you have to take them to a chemist to explain. Then they ask the chemist why does this reaction happen, and the chemist sends them to the physicist. You go through the Newtonian bit, which seems intuitive enough, but when you ask about atoms, you have to go into subatomic physics. Which is something you cannot experience without special equipment that you trust the physicist is telling the truth about.

So, yeah, while the empirical method is fantastic and the best model we have, in the end it relies on faith as much as any religion.