The author’s first point against Tyson is something Tyson would totally agree with:

“Contra popular perception, philosophy makes progress, though it does so in a different sense from progress in science. You can think of philosophy as an exploration of conceptual, as opposed to empirical, space, concerning all sorts of questions ranging from ethics to politics, from epistemology to the nature of science.”

I’ve seen Tyson speak several times. When he talks about Philosophy that is pretty much the point he makes. Philosophy may long ago been about determining the nature of the Natural World. But it no longer is. It’s about other stuff that doesn’t tell us anything about the Natural World.

The author, I suspect, is just playing PR for the Philosophy department and isn’t much more than the normal academic competition between departments for funding.