Maybe readers will enjoy this related post from Bernardo Kastrup. It may argue the point better, or not. I can't argue myself as it's too obvious for me. It's a unwinnable argument in my opinion, since it drives right into what it means to know something.
Why dismissing philosophy threatens the integrity of science
Only the most radical suggest eliminating philosophy, because that would include ethics and from that law, and also some art criticism. A much more common stance is that certain "impossible" areas of philosophy are a waste of time, and if you ask a "science-ist" to be specific about what they don't like, they'll probably only list those parts of philosophy.
Why dismissing philosophy threatens the integrity of science
https://www.bernardokastrup.com/2018/12/why-dismissing-philo...