Comments on Paul Feyerabend's Article entitled
"How to Defend Society Against Science."
John L. Waters
Use down arrow or vertical scroll bar
to view whole page!
John L. Waters
February 13, 2002
Copyright 2002 by John L. Waters. All Rights
Reserved
-------------------------------------------------------
On page 57 Feyerabend states that science claims to be
exceptional "because it has produced results." This
phrase, however, is a gross oversimplification of what
science actually claims. He goes after this dead
issue by introducing examples of results obtained by
other disciplines, and expects the reader to agree
that this argument nullifies the claim of science to
exceptional status.
One problem is that Feyerabend isn't presenting
honestly what the claim of science is. Not only does
science get results, but the results that scientists
are interested in are repeatedly verifiable results.
This indeed makes science special.
Feyerabend further weakens his argument by using
telepathy and telekinesis as examples of "results"
obtained by nonscientific disciplines. However, when
a scientist uses the word "result," the implied
meaning is repeatedly verifiable results. This
repeatable verifiability makes it possible for
scientists to predict with accuracy. Nonscientific
disciplines can predict, but often the predictions
aren't reliable. For example, there are reports of
telepathy and telekinesis in popular articles and in
trade books but these results simply aren't
reproducible. This isn't science.
Feyerabend states that science claims to get results,
but since other disciplines get results also, then
science has no legitimate claim to be special. This
idea is a straw man he keeps on beating uselessly.
How Feyerabend could have made this mistake becomes
more clear towards the end of his article, when he
states that his professional background is journalism,
not science. See page 64. In fact the man almost
sounds proud to be ignorant! But how can a person
expect to really understand a discipline when he
hasn't studied under experts and when he has done no
work in it? Should we trust a jogger or a swimmer to
teach us how to ski safely when the would-be teacher's
proud to say that he doesn't even know the way to hold
the poles and push off?
Feyerabend shows everyone that he is ignorant of the
subject on which he writes. He says that wants us to
smile. Indeed, that's very appropriate, since his
article is certainly a joke. Feyerabend gives us no
good reason to take his article seriously.
9:30PM Friday, February 8, 2002
7:55PM Monday, February 11, 2002
John L. Waters
The information on this page represents that of John Waters and not
necessarily that of Humboldt State University. John Waters takes full
responsibility for the information presented.
This page is maintained by: John Waters
The information on this page is the responsibility of the user. Humboldt State University assumes no responsibility for the content of this page.