The twentieth century brought mankind many disappointments: human life has depreciated, the ideals of freedom, equality and fraternity, for which they had fought so earnestly, have lost their attractiveness. The concepts of good and evil have acquired a new coloring and even appreciation. All that people were sure of became relative. Even such an absolutely stable concept as “knowledge” has been subjected to harsh criticism and doubt. From the moment that philosophy began to actively intervene in science, alarming times have come in the life of scientists. The methodological anarchism of Paul Feyerabend played an important role in this. About his philosophical views will tell our article.
Scientific provocateur
Paul Karl Feyerabend in the traditional philosophical world was a real fiend of hell. Not only that, he called into question all the generally accepted norms and rules of scientific knowledge. He greatly shook the authority of science as a whole. Before its appearance, science was a bastion of absolute knowledge. At least it concerned those discoveries that have already been proved. How can one challenge the empirical experience? Feyerabend showed that this is quite real. He did not shy away from outright shocking. On occasion, he liked to screw in the statement of Marx or Mao Zedong, to refer to the achievements of the shamans of Latin America and the successes of their magic, seriously proved the need not to pass by the power of psychics. Many philosophers of that time simply perceived him as a bully or a clown. Nevertheless, his theories turned out to be one of the most interesting achievements of human thought of the twentieth century.
Mom anarchy
One of the most famous works written by Paul Feyerabend is the book Against Methodological Coercion. In it, he convincingly argues that the vast majority of scientific discoveries did not occur using generally accepted concepts, but precisely because of their denial. The philosopher called to look at science with a pure gaze, not obscured by the old rules. It often seems true to us that which is familiar. In fact, it turns out that completely different assumptions lead to the truth. Therefore, Paul Feyerabend proclaimed the principle of "everything is possible." Check, not trust - this is the main message of his philosophy. At first glance, there is nothing extraordinary in this. But the philosopher decided to test even those theories that have long become pillars in their field. What immediately aroused acute hostility in the midst of the classical scholarly world. He criticized even the principle of thinking and the search for truth, which researchers have followed for centuries.
Alternative way of thinking
What does Paul Feyerabend offer in return? Against the method of constructing conclusions from existing observations and proven truths, he calls for the use of incompatible, at first glance, absurd hypotheses. Such incompatibility broadens the scientific horizons. As a result, the scientist will be able to better evaluate each of them. The philosopher also advises not to disdain turning to the long-forgotten theories, as if following the saying that everything new is well-forgotten old. Feyerabend explains this very simply: no theory can be completely protected from the possibility of refuting it by any statement. Sooner or later, there will be a fact that casts doubt on her. In addition, it is not necessary to dismiss the purely human factor, because the facts are selected by scientists based on personal preferences, from one desire to prove their case.
Paul Feyerabend: Philosophy of Science
Another important requirement of the philosopher for scientific knowledge was the presence of many competing theories, that is, proliferation. Interacting with each other, they will be constantly improved. With the domination of one theory, it runs the risk of numbing and turning into a kind of myth. Feyerabend was an ardent opponent of the idea of such a development of science, when new theories logically flow from old ones. He believed that, on the contrary, each subsequent hypothesis cancels the previous one, actively contradicts it. In this he saw the dynamics of the development of human thought and the future of mankind.
Club of experts
Some of Fejérabend’s statements can be taken as a denial of the validity of science in general. But it is not so. He simply tells us that you should not unconditionally rely on the infallibility of science. For example, unlike his contemporary Popper, who suggested that the scientist refute his own theories, Paul Feyerabend insisted that it was necessary to provide his hypotheses with several explanations at once. Desirable built on different grounds. Only in this way, in his opinion, can blind self-righteousness be avoided. This is a bit like the game “What? Where? When? ”, In which experts work out just in case several hypothetical answers, experimentally choosing the best.
Unanswered Questions
One of the most scandalous books that Paul Feyerabend wrote is Against the Method. The idea for its creation was presented to the philosopher by his friend Imre Lakatos. The meaning of the work was that each hypothesis formulated in this book by Feyerabend, Lakatos will severely criticize and create his own - refuting. The design in the form of a kind of intellectual duel was just in the spirit of the founder of methodological anarchism. The death of Lakatos in 1974 prevented the implementation of this idea. However, Feyerabend still published the book, albeit in such a half-hearted state. Later, the philosopher wrote that with his attacks on a rationalist position in this work he wanted to call Imre to defend them.
Paul Feyerabend. “Science in a free society”
Perhaps this work of the philosopher produced an even greater scandal than “Against the Method”. In it, Feyerabend appears as an outspoken anti-scientist. He smashes everything to the dust that many generations of scientists believed in, as in the Holy Grail. In addition to everything, in the introduction to this challenging book, the philosopher admits that he simply invented all this. “You have to live on something, ” he says confidentially. Feyerabend created this whole theory to shock the audience as much as possible. And thereby cause her hot interest, which cannot but affect the sales of the book. Few serious scientists can honestly admit that all his research is contrived. Although often this is exactly what actually turns out to be. On the other hand, perhaps this is another provocation?
