-
Paul Feyerabend
In Paul Feyerabend's book "Against Method and Science in a Free Society," Feyerabend defends the idea that there are no methodological rules which scientists always use. He declined any single prescriptive scientific method could, in manner, limit the activities of scientists and hence restrict scientific progress. In his view, science would benefit most from a "dose" of theoretical anarchism. -
Paul F.
He also thought that, theoretically, anarchism was essential because it was more diplomatic than other organizational systems by not imposing rigid rules on scientists. Feyerabend's position was deemed radical in the scientific community because implying that philosophy can neither succeed in affirming a general description of science nor devising a method for differentiating scientific from non-scientific entities like folklore. -
Paul F.
Feyerabend's position also implies that scientists should digress from philosophical guidelines if they are to aim for revolutions.
To support his position that methodological rules do not contribute to scientific success, Feyerabend provides counter-examples to the sustain that science operates according to a fixed methodology. -
Paul F.
He took some examples of episodes in science that are generally regarded as indisputable instances of advancement and argued that these episodes violated all standard prescriptive rules of science. However, he claimed that applying such laws in these historical situations would have prevented the scientific revolution needed for continued progression.