Feyerabend and Wooism

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Lately, I have seen some fervient admirers of woo stuff screaming "Feyerabeeeend" everytime someone brings science and scientific methodology to the discussion. For them, everything "science" (they insist to take it as a somehow "solid" structure, much like a church, instead of a collection of methodologies) has done is questionable, no more real or tangible or valuable than astrology.

Is astonishing to note how different we all are, and how some individuals will focus on anything that can give them, how should I say this, a "sense of tranquility" in that what they believe is true, no matter what any skeptic tells them.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Have them read this:

http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kunchith/dcs/popper/popper.html

~~Paul

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Thanks for that link, should be interesting reading. :)

[geni]

Have them read this:

http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kunchith/dcs/popper/popper.html

~~Paul

Generaly expecting people to read booklength stuff on the net doesn't work too well.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Generaly expecting people to read booklength stuff on the net doesn't work too well.
Part I will do. :D

~~Paul

[Cuddles]

It never ceases to amaze me how people can get paid for this sort of thing. For some reason I'm actually expected to get results at work. I wish I was a philosopher.

[Earthborn]

Have them read this:

http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kunchith/dcs/popper/popper.htmlI am not very much familiar with the work of Feyerabend, but seeing how he presented the views of Popper, Kuhn and Lakatos I see no reason trust Wikipedia ("]D. C. Stove[/url]'s describtion of Feyerabend's views either. Luckily, I find that [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Feyerabend) often does quite well on philosophical issues. It's format seems well suited for showing points and counterpoints.

There appears to be more than enough in Feyerabend's philosophy for believers in the incredible to hang on to.

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

There appears to be more than enough in Feyerabend's philosophy for believers in the incredible to hang on to.

At least superficially. The funny thing is that some of them will brag about Feyerabend without even reading him! Just to know that some "intelligent dude" has said that "science is wrong" suffice for them to shout it everytime they can. ;)

[hammegk]

How to rewrite the sentence: Cook discovered Cook Strait.

Lakatos:
Cook `discovered' Cook Strait.

Popper:
Among an infinity of equally impossible alternatives, one hypothesis which has been especially fruitful in suggesting problems for further research and critical discussion is the conjecture (first `confirmed' by the work of Cook) that a strait separates northern from southern New Zealand.

Kuhn:
It would of course be a gross anachronism to call the flat-earth paradigm in geography mistaken. It is simply incommensurable with later paradigms: as is evident from the fact that, for example, problems of antipodean geography could not even be posed under it. Under the Magellanic paradigm, however, one of the problems posed, and solved in the negative, was that of whether New Zealand is a single land mass. That this problem was solved by Cook is, however, a vulgar error of whig historians, utterly discredited by recent historiography. Discovery of the Strait would have been impossible, or at least would not have been science, but for the presence of the Royal Society on board, in the person of Sir Joseph Banks. Much more research by my graduate students into the current sociology of the geographical profession will be needed, however, before it will be known whether, under present paradigms, the problem of the existence of Cook Strait remains solved, or has become unsolved again, or an un-problem.

Feyerabend:
Long before the constipated and boneheaded Cook, whose knowledge of the optics of his telescopes was minimal, rationally imposed, by means of tricks, jokes, and non-sequiturs, the myth of Cook Strait on the `educated' world, Maori scientists not only `knew' of the existence of the Strait but often crossed it by turning themselves into birds. Now, however, not only this ability but the very knowledge of the `existence' of the Strait has been lost forever. This is owing to the malignant influence exercised on education by authoritarian scientists and philosophers, especially the LSE critical rationalists, who have not accepted my criticisms and should be sacked. "No doubt this financial criticism of ideas will be more effective than [...] intellectual criticism and it should be used". (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. LVIII, 1978, p. 144).

ROTFLMGDFAO! :D

[Yahzi]

Lately, I have seen some fervient admirers of woo stuff screaming "Feyerabeeeend"
Chanting names of power to drive off demonic enemies is a well-established practice.

Given the dearth of vampires, it seems to work pretty well, too.

:D

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

ROTFLMGDFAO! :D

From where are those quotes? They are really funny. But I have to recon that, among them, I prefer Kuhn, by a large extent.

[Earthborn]

Those quotes are from the previously linked to book (http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kun...er/popper.html), the end of chapter 1, "Neutralizing Success-words" (http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kunchith/dcs/popper/chapter-01.html).

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Those quotes are from the previously linked to book (http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kun...er/popper.html), the end of chapter 1, "Neutralizing Success-words" (http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kunchith/dcs/popper/chapter-01.html).

Thanks. Damn, I really need to find the time to read it!

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I am not very much familiar with the work of Feyerabend, but seeing how he presented the views of Popper, Kuhn and Lakatos I see no reason trust D. C. Stove's describtion of Feyerabend's views either.
You're saying his presentation of those folks was not accurate? How so?

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Those quotes are from the previously linked to book, the end of chapter 1, "Neutralizing Success-words".
They are from the book, but they are not quotes from the four philosophers. They are Stove's attempt at writing like the four philosophers would write, if they were to write about Cook discovering Cook Strait.

Damn funny.

~~ Paul