I agree. I minored in philosophy, and the one overarching issue isn't the comments made about philosophy by scientists, it's the misunderstanding of what modern philosophy consists of.
The article states three example criticisms. I find the derision of the first two completely fair -- neither are very useful criticisms. The derision of the third is misguided. The criticism is completely fair -- which is why philosophy itself is the biggest voice of that criticism! Analytic philosophy is philosophy's answer to that entire criticism of (what is now called) continental philosophy.
The biggest problem with scientists is not their criticism, it's that their criticism is dated. Philosophy had this debate decades ago and has since changed as a result.
The article states three example criticisms. I find the derision of the first two completely fair -- neither are very useful criticisms. The derision of the third is misguided. The criticism is completely fair -- which is why philosophy itself is the biggest voice of that criticism! Analytic philosophy is philosophy's answer to that entire criticism of (what is now called) continental philosophy.
The biggest problem with scientists is not their criticism, it's that their criticism is dated. Philosophy had this debate decades ago and has since changed as a result.