You make a good point, but where did I say that I believe that associating philosophy with science is pie-in-the-sky ridiculous? What I did say is that the metaphor is weak without bringing precision to how it should be interpreted, and your particular interpretation is sensible but a bit forced. Does being the progenitor of science make philosophy the thumb of the hand?

No, there may have once been a time when that metaphor was applicable, but I wouldn't say that it's the case today. As for the idea that philosophy guides decisions on how we practice science, well... a book or course on the forces of economy, which is offered by most major universities, is recommended.