5 ms·

Yes Paul Feyerabend, a philosopher of science, argued that true freedom and liberty arise when individuals actively and democratically shape their societies, f

Yes Paul Feyerabend, a philosopher of science, argued that true freedom and liberty arise when individuals actively and democratically shape their societies, free from the dominance of any single ideology, including science. He contended that science, often regarded as the ultimate path to knowledge, is merely one of many traditions and should not hold a privileged position in society. Feyerabend advocated for a “democratic relativism,” emphasizing equal rights for all traditions and proposing a separation between the state and any specific ideology, akin to the separation of church and state. He believed that this approach would allow individuals to live according to their own values and beliefs, fostering a more inclusive and liberated society. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00201748008601890 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0020174800860189... Feyerabend, P. (1980). Democracy, Elitism, and Scientific Method. Inquiry, 23(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201748008601890 https://doi.org/10.1080/00201748008601890

goatlover 2y ago
> He contended that science, often regarded as the ultimate path to knowledge, is merely one of many traditions and should not hold a privileged position in society. He's plain wrong about that part. Science isn't another tradition, it's a way of putting the world to the test to figure out how things work. It's absurd and dangerous to maintain Feyerabend's view in the midst of a pandemic or climate change, for example, which we've seen with the alternate facts and conspiracy theories.
- walleeee 2y ago
  I'm not convinced these glosses pin him down. He's worth reading, even if you only want to test your mastery of your own position on questions like this.
ativzzz 2y ago
> He believed that this approach would allow individuals to live according to their own values and beliefs What if someone's values and beliefs are that certain other values and beliefs should not be allowed? Like what if a group believes that gay people shouldn't exist openly in society, or that certain racial groups should be genocided or stripped of their rights? I think this is a fundamental issue of tolerance of beliefs - how do you tolerate intolerant beliefs without sliding into intolerance yourself?

goatlover 2y ago

> He contended that science, often regarded as the ultimate path to knowledge, is merely one of many traditions and should not hold a privileged position in society. He's plain wrong about that part. Science isn't another tradition, it's a way of putting the world to the test to figure out how things work. It's absurd and dangerous to maintain Feyerabend's view in the midst of a pandemic or climate change, for example, which we've seen with the alternate facts and conspiracy theories.

walleeee 2y ago
I'm not convinced these glosses pin him down. He's worth reading, even if you only want to test your mastery of your own position on questions like this.

ativzzz 2y ago

> He believed that this approach would allow individuals to live according to their own values and beliefs What if someone's values and beliefs are that certain other values and beliefs should not be allowed? Like what if a group believes that gay people shouldn't exist openly in society, or that certain racial groups should be genocided or stripped of their rights? I think this is a fundamental issue of tolerance of beliefs - how do you tolerate intolerant beliefs without sliding into intolerance yourself?