viernes, 30 de marzo de 2007

Feyerabend's critics

Feyerabend's papers

Within of papers of Feyerabend, the historical process are very important in the development of knowledge, the history is inherent to knowledge. The actual education “alienates” to individual and it suppress the progress of science. Further, the dominant society and influential groups delay the progress of science and knowledge. The best form of progress in the knowledge is the Anarchy. “For a changing universe and it without established conditions, diversity of theories and methods”. If we clung to this, we do looses other forms potentially “useful” of discovery and analysis. No all theories is quite certain (true), if we postulates new hypothesis and theories that “confirms” or increases the support of the theories already established, we explain about same things and we don't contribute to knowledge. What it does not explain the theory is the start point of new searches. New paths implies new terms (dialectic), thus he concluded that the knowledge must be acquired for pluralistic methodologies. The best method to make science is contrainductive (falsationism). Alternative hypothesis must be proposed and it must be contrasted. Many hypothesis are necessary for a major covering of the reality. The principle of consistency is debated. A theory not must be “confirmed”, it must be “contrasted” with other(s). Theories cannot be dogmas, they are denied or ignore hypothesis potentially falsifiying. Plurality of opinion is advisable for the objective knowledge. Also the critical view of past is main in the science. Not to the scientific chauvinism. In the search of knowledge is necessary the imagination and creativity, however, any statement or sentence cannot be taken as valid in the knowledge, it must be analysed carefully. Because the imagination and observations are linked to our senses (subjective), we must be create new conceptual frameworks to analyze the phenomena and data, about this, he stated that the concepts are related to theories that explain them. The phenomena in reality are linked to their conceptual framework and they can mean different according to a particular view point (Feyerabend, 1965). Feyerabend postulated that is possible to make science “without experience” (1969), however, it does not possible because the data always are linked to experience (historical or sensitive). Thus, Paul Feyerabend proposed a plurality of opinion in the search of knowledge; but with a contrastation of theories and hypothesis sensu Lakatos. In his book Against the method (1975), Feyerabend claims for a “anarchy” in the science, nevertheless, he assume that the best form to acquire knowledge is the contrastation of theories, this goes against which it proposes.

Trough his life, Feyerabend modified many of his affirmations in their papers, therefore, he stated different and contradictory affirmations and ideas which were reformulated after, among they the science without experience and the importance of creativity and imagination. About this, he wrote after in 1987 (Critical Inquiry): “The conceited view that some humans beings, having the divine gift of creativity, can rebuild creation to fit their fantasies without consulting nature and without asking the rest of us, has not only led to tremendous social, ecological, and personal problems, it also has very doubtful credentials, scientifically speaking.” However, his perspective about the philosophy of science is valid because it always will be linked to historical process and political prejudices, etc. Without the history we does not develop knowledge and it is important in the explication of the world (which is historical).

In the history, the different events influences of the individual's life and groups of research. To Feyerabend, it was important because the sociological phenomena press the science to search new paths towards the knowledge. He critics hardly the institutions and methodologies which denies the diversity of opinion and those that delay the “progress” too. I agree with Feyerabend in these ideas because those situation happened in the scientific world.

Paul Karl Feyerabend (January 13, 1924 to February 1994) was philosopher of science best known for his work as a professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, where he worked for three decades (1958-1989). His major works include Against Method (published in 1975), Science in a Free Society (published in 1978) and Farewell to Reason (a collection of papers published in 1987). Feyerabend became famous for his purportedly anarchistic view of science and his rejection of the existence of universal methodological rules. He is an influential figure in the philosophy of science, and also in the sociology of scientific knowledge.