Funny how easily we are trapped by the very mechanism of thought: language!
We use language to think conceptually and language has too much abstract malleability for metaphor.
The possible permutations of extractable metaphor and our pattern-seeking penchant for storytelling and reliance on anthropomorphistic teleological thinking is disastrous!
We look at clouds and see "figures"! Should we insist the figures are "really there"?
We look at nature and see "design"! Some insist the design is "really there".
Is there a way out of this metaphor mentality?
Yes! But, it requires a discipline to thinking that entails an effort few expend when they already have a comfy notion of what is "really there".
So, one man looks at clouds and sees water vapor which can be construed in the shape of animals; while another see only animals.
The ludicrous argument that results is actually more the fault of the one willing to give the "animal viewer" an equal platform on which to debate without dismissing them outright.