{"title":"Epistemological Anarchism Meets Epistemic Voluntarism","authors":"M. Kusch","doi":"10.1017/9781108575102.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I shall compare and contrast central themes of Paul Feyerabend’s bestknown work, Against Method (1975, subsequently “AM”) with pivotal ideas of Bas van Fraassen’s 2002 book, The Empirical Stance (subsequently “ES”). The comparison appears fruitful for two reasons: first, because van Fraassen is one of the few contemporary philosophers of science who continue to engage closely and charitably with Feyerabend’s work; and, second, because van Fraassen disagrees with some of Feyerabend’s central contentions. I do not here have the space to determine conclusively who of the two philosophers is right where they take different views on a given question; I shall be satisfied to clearly identify the issues and disputes that need further reflection.","PeriodicalId":334687,"journal":{"name":"Interpreting Feyerabend","volume":"163 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interpreting Feyerabend","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108575102.006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
In this paper I shall compare and contrast central themes of Paul Feyerabend’s bestknown work, Against Method (1975, subsequently “AM”) with pivotal ideas of Bas van Fraassen’s 2002 book, The Empirical Stance (subsequently “ES”). The comparison appears fruitful for two reasons: first, because van Fraassen is one of the few contemporary philosophers of science who continue to engage closely and charitably with Feyerabend’s work; and, second, because van Fraassen disagrees with some of Feyerabend’s central contentions. I do not here have the space to determine conclusively who of the two philosophers is right where they take different views on a given question; I shall be satisfied to clearly identify the issues and disputes that need further reflection.