@minouette
If you do some basic experimentation with prisms, you will conclude that Newton based an entire theory on shoddy, incomplete work that only works in one specific arrangement. You get different answers as you make the required variations (testing your own ideas).
Besides these other empirical, contradictive results, we can see these errors in other spectra, such as most rainbows, color theory, pottery color changes per kiln temperature (black body), or even the lack of 'green planets'.
It's not that we should not have phenomenological and physiological models as well, it's that if #evolution has brought about certain phenomena within the range of perception, then it is driven by the #physics that co-existed during that development. These things are not separate; there are no vacuums in the environments where these interactions & change take place.
If you're asking me if "nature or nurture", " #color theory or color #science", " #QM interpretation A or Z", "music theory or acoustics", etc, my response is 'wrong question' (false dichotomies).
You're welcome to set your own standards, of course, but linear toy models are not satisfactory to me, even if they were once considered marvels (or #paradox). They do play an important role in our progress, but all have expiration dates, where nature demands that they mature at some point.