Philosophy also discusses things like how we consider a answer to be robust; stuff we now consider pretty ingrained. It's not all religiose has-no-answer pondering.
It's just that most of the 'ingrained' stuff has been settled now, and people are more interested in writing about new, unanchored stuff. The same is true of science - few professional researchers bother retreading settled ground. How often do you see an article by modern professional scientists that examine the basics of the electrical resistivity of copper?
Sure but thats not the point. Science ask plenty of questions it cannot test.
It's important to distinguish between the act of philosophizing and then the disciplin and it's historical context.
Only in the instances where philosophy asks questions science can test.
Questions like "What is The Good?" and "Is it morally right to do this thing?" are not those kinds of questions.