Cars do not rely on science, primarily. The existence of cars is primarily due to engineers developing technology (a different process than that of science), not scientists doing science.<p>If you believe that science can explain everything, your conceptual map widens the concept of &#x27;science&#x27; to include practically everything that refers to the objective world, making the concept less useful for precise thought about epistemology.<p>And philosophy is more directly useful to scientists than cars are to philosophers. For one thing you&#x27;re comparing a concrete artifact to epistemological processes. We&#x27;re comparing processes, not artifacts. The concepts developed by philosophers have <i>direct</i> relevance to scientists, see my examples above.