In Turkey it's ATARI instead. Every game console was called ATARI for a long time.

I don't know who is the we you keep talking about but what makes your words any different than "someone"? I am just going with what is widely accepted in acedemia. As for what makes natural science different from something like philosophy, in natural sciences you have to be able to demonstrate your findings in real life to prove what you are putting forward to be true. In philosophy only requirement is that your proposed argument have to make sense in context of the system of thinking that you have put forward. You generally can't really prove your point with observable facts in philosophy and even if you are somehow able to that just means you have gone beyond what is expected of you as that is not a hard requirement. Don't even get started with artificial label bullshit. Once you go there there is no reason to argue anymore as everything can argued to be artificial and it just makes the waters muddy. You are talking as something can't both be biased and logical. Everything we think, say and do are biased so you are not in a position to argue what is logical or not.

Scientific method? In simple terms Physics is a natural science and philosophy is not.

Who are the "we"? While I value philosophy, it's not identical to physics in any shape or form in ways that concern academics.

When I was little I thought of a theory timeline splitting at each action and there being multiple timelines each containing what would have happened if it went that specific way. Then I saw many worlds interpretation.