Not answering directly the post, but something in line with it: I believe not all (maybe most of) knowledge is scientific, but that doesn’t invalidate it. A lot of things can’t be studied by the scientific method, but people intuitively understood and learned about it along the centuries.

This should be common sense, but society has gone crazy about considering only science as knowledge and now ignores valuable learnings that sometimes are more right then science itself.

This should not be confused with negating science (like global warming deniers): when you can study something by the scientific method normally you will get deeper and with less mistakes with it. But when you don’t, you can still have knowledge by other methods

Maybe the win percentage of lucky and unlucky people are the same, but lucky people win when it matters most, while unlucky people when there is nothing important at stake