Abstract

This article seeks to demonstrate the applicability of Paul Feyerabend's "anything goes" epistemology to the development of knowledge. This study is a literature review. Data were collected through data inventory, then analyzed and interpreted. The results of the study show that "all methodologies have limitations, and the only 'rule' that can survive is 'anything goes'". The main idea of anything goes is, first, the recommendation proposed by Feyerabend related to the discourse of anything goes, only remains as a negative freeing recommendation because it requires a certain scientific situation that is considered to restrict scientists; and is often understood simply as advocating the absence of laws, methodologies, and rules in science. Second, it actually limits the movement of scientists because it requires participation only in practices that are undefined and cannot be defined. Third, it is only a consequence of the first and second premises. In other words, anything goes, both externally and internally, contains two dimensions of freedom at once. The differences in position must be clarified to avoid confusion about the status of freedom contained in anything goes.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.