What's wrong with helping consciousness in the realm of poetry and religion? It's the most humanistic thing we can know, after all.
Consciousness, being internal and subjective, exists at odds with anything else that science considers. Sure, study cognition and neurology, but there's an ontological gap between those and experience.
Who is saying there is anything against either poetry or religion saying whatever they can about consciousness? I'm doubting the value of pidgeonholing.
To claim an ontological gap is to put the cart before the horse. If or when we understand consciousness, we will be able to tell if there is a relevant ontological gap, or whether it is an illusion generated by our ignorance.
Consciousness, being internal and subjective, exists at odds with anything else that science considers. Sure, study cognition and neurology, but there's an ontological gap between those and experience.