Probably for the same reason that we celebrate Columbus Day instead of Leif Ericson Day.
Because Aristotile was a pirate who committed mass genocide?
Isaac Asimov also wrote non-fiction and he probably got that idea from doing research.
Asimov was primarily a fiction writer. Fiction writers make up bull as second hand nature.
The quote you provided for Philolaus didn't say anything about him coming up with Aristotile's three proofs. I haven't been able to come up with anything that says that.
Maybe none that you could find. Remember that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
In this case it is. For example, it's well known that historians have significant difficulty separating the beliefs of Aristotile from the beliefs of Plato. Aristotile tends to ramble and use Plato's teachings as his own, exchanging his own teachings as Plato's, and talk as a fictional third party.
If we don't have the work of the original person we can't rely on their caveboy students to give an accurate description of their beliefs.
That's all most FE'rs do, quibble about a minor point and think they've won. 'They believed that newts and frogs simply appeared!' Irrelevant. My goodness. One of the founders of DNA has claimed that Africans are genetically inferior in intellect to all other species with no proof. Does that mean that DNA suddenly doesn't exist?
No. It means that he's an idiot and we should take his hypothesis' about what DNA truly is, how it works, its function, and whatever else he imagines about it with a grain of salt.
That DNA exists is simple observation. Just like the existence of frogs and newts is a simple observation.
Interpretation of how they work, what they do, and their function is another matter entirely.