A controversial and influential voice in the philosophy of science, Paul K. Feyerabend was born and educated in Vienna. After military service during World War. Tratado Contra El Metodo (Filosofia y Ensayo / Philosophy and Essay) by Paul K. Feyerabend at – ISBN – ISBN Tratado contra el metodo by Paul K. Feyerabend at – ISBN – ISBN – Softcover.
|Published (Last):||24 November 2012|
|PDF File Size:||18.83 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.69 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Given the thesis, it would have made more sense to focus on half a dozen discoveries from the c20th. Where I happen to disagree is wh I read Feyerabend because I know he’s a critical figure in metpdo philosophy of science, not because I expected to agree with anything he said.
The author brings in an anarchistic view of the scientific process— if there is even a “process” at all— as opposed to strict methodological views, as those proposed in, feeyerabend.
What a breath of fresh air! Let’s not forget however that the book is called “against method” and not “against science”. Taking a radically different perspective on the aesthetics of what theory is, Feyerabend attack one of the scared cows of science and mathematics — that of consistency.
Alternatively, science is a bundle of current and possible procedures unified under the shared goal of understanding and predicting. Namely, when he states that there is no one scientific method, and therefore there is no scientific method– it’s a little more complex than that.
Most likely, he didn’t know or didn’t care what he did either. There is a cobtra in between how we do science and how we present it to the metoddo – for example, the structure of a pajl publiction has absolutely nothing to do with how the actual results were obtained.
Practitioners and “fans” of science, it’s eye-opening. He does use examples other than this one, but they are not particularly convincing and often trivial several optical illusions among them. In his entry in the Supplement to Who’s Who in America, he is quoted as saying, “Leading intellectuals with their zeal for objectivity are criminals, not the feywrabend of mankind. The introduction of rigid tests, the spreading awareness of problems like the conrta comparisons problem, too small sample sizes and more, the availability of online anonymous comments etc.
Should we not desire any particular agency, we should embrace any idea for what it is worth, at the time that we need it. Feyerabend became famous for his purportedly anarchistic view of science and his rejection of the existence of universal methodological rules.
This is of course, in a big way, where Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason steps in, and it is at this point that Feyerabend stops short. Thank ketodo that I had at least read Wittgenstein thoroughly, so I didn’t feel like a complete ignoramus.
The way his philosophy in feyerabendd and this book in particular have been set up can be interpreted in different ways. The one phrase which most summarizes his thought is “Anything goes.
Being rational is all the craze nowadays.
Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge by Paul Karl Feyerabend
Truth and meaning are perhaps two of the most polarizing issues one can write about. Which facts, exactly are we meant to discard? Feyerabend states that Galileo never actually disproved Ptolemy’s theory, this was mainly because he operated outside the bounds of 16th and 17th-century science. But then Lakatos died. Of course, some ideas will become undecideable should the foundation for that idea be incommensurable with our own foundation.
And Galileo’s case is the holy grail in the philosophy of science. By the time we leave Galileo and his telescope which, contra to Feyerabend’s claim on p.
On the other hand, it was later concluded that planetary regularity was not so easy to discern. Instead of keeping science confined in its own little community Feyerabend breaks boundaries and intertwines disciplines.
Anarchistic in his approa A great book dealing with the way in which science loses something by rigidly adhering to antiquated methodologies and theories.
Feyerabend should, undoubtedly, be praised for providing a scathing critique of the status of the scientific enterprise within contemporary society. To solve the issue, criticism is set forth that removes the prior theory and creates a new one with new problems. One must also assume that science owes its success to the correct method and not merely to a lucky accident [italics in original].
My library Help Advanced Book Search. Galileo was successful because he strayed away from the scientific method of that time. And the anarchic spirit is there on page one, where Feyerabend asserts, mischie Well, it’s hard to know what to make of a book like this, especially in our current moment, when a kind of popular anti-foundationalism has resulted in a political calamity.
Tratado Contra El Metodo
First, how we actually do science has very little resemblance to how we say we do science. Their education should be focused on helping them being able to decide what theory they like and prefer, just to avoid being influenced too easily.
Science, united under the shared goal of discovery, is the open and continuous questioning of nature accompanied by predictions and, to the greatest extent possible, their verification. Where I happen to disagree is when he takes this to its logical extreme. Plus I, like most scientists, don’t understand Latin or Greek. Instead Feyerabend offers a constellation of polemics, beginning with an analysis of Galileo’s ‘confirmation’ of Copernicanism to show that real scientific practice is counterinductive, irrational, propagandistic, and riddled with inconsistencies.