>>Could you elaborate? To me, there isn't necessarily a dependence between metaphysics and e.g. physics, so not answering to the questions of the former doesn't have to lead to a failure (in terms of reaching a truth or something resembling it) in answering the questions of the latter.
to the extent that physics engages ontology rather than mere "practical applications", some sort of metaphysical assumptions are necessary. Traditionally, we have fallen back on various causal, atomistic materialisms, but things are changing. The ontology falling out of quantum mechanics appears to be a sort of idealism where the multiverse is composed of all possibilities.
And I guess I should have been clear that this line of reasoning only applies to 1 kind of truth, one that engages ontology. Practical truths are still true, in some way.