> isn't it more accurate to say that the natural sciences today explore models for the world in which we live?
This is entirely true, and there are absolutely areas of natural science where the "right models" are pretty unclear, such as theoretical physics, as you mention. In this sense my distinction is somewhat fuzzy.
I am likely biased to perceive a large gulf because I work in molecular genetics, a field in which the there is a lot we are certain about; much of what we do is filling in holes and fleshing out the details of overarching models that are known to be largely correct.
This is entirely true, and there are absolutely areas of natural science where the "right models" are pretty unclear, such as theoretical physics, as you mention. In this sense my distinction is somewhat fuzzy.
I am likely biased to perceive a large gulf because I work in molecular genetics, a field in which the there is a lot we are certain about; much of what we do is filling in holes and fleshing out the details of overarching models that are known to be largely correct.