This is a great piece! You clearly and concisely lay out and illuminate the issues (notably through the devil's advocate back-and-forth) which are important for anyone who wants to take philosophy seriously.

Your piece spurred the thought that philosophers need to understand (tribal) assumptions that shape their work. Wittgenstein realized his assumptions, developed new ones, repudiated the Tractatus, and produced his most important work.

The divide might blur if philosophers forgot their tribe's assumptions, and developed and presented their own. It's interesting that Husserl saw himself as a scientist in developing phenomenology. And Hume and Berkeley are considered empiricists, yet they seriously criticized science.

Arguably it weakens philosophy to treat science as as an all-in or all-out proposition. A more nuanced view, which many scientists hold, leaves room for philosophical exploration.