The eagle and the starlings: Galileo’s argument for the autonomy of science—how pertinent is it today?

After Galileo’s argument for the autonomy of science is analysed and adapted to take into account later developments of scientific practices, we conclude that, in the final analysis, it is not compelling. Nevertheless, Galileo’s argument still provides a useful point of reference, for aspects of it can be interpreted to anticipate central components of the often acclaimed ideal of science as value free, so that appraising it contributes to the larger purpose of exploring how well that ideal stands up today. Finally, we will argue that residue from Galileo’s struggle with the Church remains with us, making it difficult to identify the conditions that would need to be put into place today for any robust sense of the autonomy of science to be defensible.

► Exposition and critical analysis of Galileo’s argument for the autonomy of science. ► Generalization of Galileo’s argument to take into account more recent developments of scientific practices. ► Neither Galileo’s argument, not our generalized version of it, suffices as an argument for the autonomy of science.