I agree that there's that clash of cultures and sensibilities. Don't forget, though, that there are currently critics of science who say science isn't sufficiently philosophical, a deficiency which has landed theoretical physics in the dead end of string theory.

Metaphysics may not work in science itself, but that's what makes it philosophical, so why should scientific standards determine what happens in philosophy?

Anyway, I'm critiquing metaphysics here, by taking a pragmatic, postmodern view of it. I'm saying we shouldn't be naïve about metaphysical generalizations, including those of naturalism. That's why I combine naturalism with cosmicism. The whole or noumenal essence of the universe isn't exactly "natural" in the pragmatic, objectifiable, exploitable sense since its self-creativity is monstrous.