I agree with your comment. The esoteric side of religions tends to hold us up to noble standards, and science does have a humbling humanistic side. But neither point is relevant to the nature of objectification.
There's the pre-civilized stance of animism/personification, and then there's the civilized stance of objectification. The former imbues the subject matter with vitality, in a naïve, open-hearted, child-like fashion. The latter drains nature of its apparent meaning, turning the animating spirit into matter and energy, forces that can be mapped and controlled.
Magicians used to attempt to control nature with magical spells and prayers. We've made a science out of the same conceit, using scientific maps and gadgets to impose our will on disenchanted nature. The natural order, drained of the vitality we'd presumed was there in our naïve period resembles a slave, a passive, dehumanized body with no inherent rights that can be used as a tool.
But what to make of a natural order of slaves that perpetuates itself with no inner will or purpose? Zombies and re-enchantment! Pantheism!
This is just my take on Weber's thesis, and I argue it at greater length in these articles, by the way:
