Some people have criticize the subject of philosophy for preventing the further development of science. But isn't it a massive misconception?

Yes it is a massive misconception to criticize philosophy for preventing the further development of science.

There is wisdom and love in philosophy that charcterizes the human being that modern science denies.

Humanity is characterized by philosophy, which necessarily encompasses ethics, aesthetics and natural philosophy

It is ok to want to improve one’s life. There is a great deal of scope in the philosophical approach to science than one can give it credit for. What we call science today was known as natural philosophy a couple of centuries ago.

Science or modern science as it is known today did take a wrong turn when the “empiricists” discarded immanence from their perspective.

Modern science - as opposed to traditional perspectives of the cosmos - is fragmented.

How do we know that it is fragmented? Because it is framed within a set of questions that exclude critical parameters to be evaluated on its own merits.

Now, there is the connection between Fibonacci prime numbers and spirals which unmistakably expresses beauty. Does modern science recognize this?

Is there consciousness involved so as to bring about Fibonacci prime number spiral patterns in nature? Can optimization occur without consciousness behind it? The cosmos - Greek root word meaning “cosmetic” - is optimized for beauty.

https://phys.org/news/2013-02-nature-pattern-fibonacci.html

Consciousness of patterns is the distinction of human beings.

The Fibonacci pattern brings together consciousness, truth and beauty at once.

There exist consciousness behind the cosmos that engenders the patterns that are displayed therein.

There is a being that is conscious that is the custodian of the cosmos.

The cosmos is the conjugate of this conscious being.

This consciousness is the custodian of the cosmos who has infused principles into it that engenders beauty in the cosmos.

The custodian of the cosmos yearns for beauty - like all humans do - and so the cosmos was created.

Can modern science come to the conclusions that I have spelled out? If it can, that is wonderful.

It is ok to create useful things just as long as the principles used to create those things conform to principles that engender beauty.

Here’s an example of useful beauty: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mop.29797?utm_campaign=Microwave_and_Optical_Technology_Letters_TrendMD_1&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=TrendMD

Basic motivational ideas behind beauty can be found here: https://phys.org/news/2011-10-beautiful-math-fractals.html?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Phys.org_TrendMD_1

Perhaps some day we can be inspired by these: https://www.academia.edu/42988393/The_Fibonacci_Pyramid_of_Gizahttps://secretenergy.com/the-pyramids-of-giza-were-the-source-of-ancient-free-energy/

Galaxy Classification with Neural Nets: https://deep-r.medium.com/hello-there-this-is-my-first-blog-2b98a4690f82

Codebox Software - Using a Neural Network to Classify Galaxies: https://codebox.net/pages/neural-network-for-galaxy-classification?fbclid=IwAR1WlnlsJy4v9xpCBJu2JNQn5PSamgyabiR5iu1nQmY3cTpw_4K7AHSpiz4