Feyerabend - Philosophy, Science & Society.pdf

https://thesis-journal.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Hajdin-Abazi.pdf, 2019

Feyerabend generally is known most for his discovery on the helpfulness of breaking rules when they become a hindrance and for the legitimacy of the counter-inductive approach as a way to make fundamental changes in science. But his view about the decontamination of old theories and the implantation of new theories‘ conception deserves equal recognition. And, of course, his alternative of open instead of closed exchange is invaluable as epistemological contribution. All this together make Feyerabend‘s viewpoint very distinct, especially to understand the need of openness as a condition to make easy the scientific development. Those three aspects constitute the originality of Feyerabend‘s contribution in the philosophy of science, which will be the focus of this paper. These novelties, as it will be argued, fill respective aspects where previously there were shortcomings, which made possible to clarify epistemologically the understanding and explanation, according to the practice, how the development of science and the growth of knowledge were attained (and as a consequence how they usually go). The approach of the treatise pursues the historical context and the theoretical articulation of Feyerabend‘s view, including some critical reflections. Keywords: legitimacy of counter-rules, open exchange, (de)contamination of evidence, scientific development, growth of knowledge, Feyerabend

Metascience 8(2): 226-233 (1999)

Metascience, 1999

2020

The epistemological problem associated with Karl Paul Feyerabend as a philosopher of Science resides beneath the fact that different critics of his works give divers interpretations of them. His works and the accounts they present have no common structure. This plurality and conflictual interpretations of him makes it difficult, if not impossible to pin him to a particular tradition in the Philosophy of Science. For this reason, while some of his critics consider him to be a relativist, to some, he is a Dadaist, a confusionist and an anarchist, yet others think of Feyerabend as the worst enemy of Science. This diversity of interpretation of Feyerabend, in my opinion, only goes to reassure us of our reading of him. That is, Feyerabend is closely associated with pluralism than anything else. My aim, in this paper is thus propose a thesis and attempt a justification. The thesis is that my reading of Against Method, 1993 and The Tyranny of Science, 2011 , justifies the thesis above. Thi...

Riffing on Feyerabend: Direct Observation, Paraconsistent Logic and a Research Immanent Account of the Rationality of Science, 2023

Feyerabend's work, particularly his early papers contain important insights into the nature of science and scientific progress. I discuss his insights into the limits of empiricist foundationalism and positivism. I explain how the work of a number of philosophers has borne out Feyerabend's claims in startling and interesting ways. Nevertheless, I criticise Feyerabend's move from his attack on universal method to relativism. I point out that Feyerabend never confronted a well-developed research immanent view of the rationality of scientific change, which shows the limitations of the arguments in Against Method.

2000

Dogmatism as a spiritual principle becomes reality when one class of principles, knowledge or methods is taken as universal, as a sole origin, as the only form of knowledge and as the only methodological class, etc. in order to reach Tru t h , Righteousness and Intelligence. Feyerabend, like other critics in all spheres of scientism, from the scientific-methodological to the socio-political sphere, talks about the dangers tow a rd s which a dogmatism of scientific mind and methods is leading. According to Fe yerabend «the conception of one unique system of criteria which has always been leading towards success and is still leading towards it», with no concern to its pragmatism and utility, creates the basis for spiritual monolithism and totalitarianism. Just like other forms of dogmatism, this form in its incorporation by a state becomes a state ideology. As such, it becomes inauspicious for furt h e r d e velopment of science, because it pre vents the existence and development of o...

An essay review of Paul Feyerabend, 'The Tyranny of Science' (Polity 2011) which explores the contemporary significance of Feyerabend's philosophy in the light of public concerns about science.