Dear Readers: Your assistance in recovering from a devastating fire will be greatly appreciated.
| rjohara.net |
Darwin-L Message Log 7:11 (March 1994)
Academic Discussion on the History and Theory of the Historical Sciences
This is one message from the Archives of Darwin-L (1993–1997), a professional discussion group on the history and theory of the historical sciences.
<7:11>From Kim.Sterelny@vuw.ac.nz Mon Mar 7 20:33:21 1994 Date: Tue, 8 Mar 1994 15:33:11 +1300 To: Darwin-L@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu From: Kim.Sterelny@vuw.ac.nz Subject: Re: Paul Feyerabend dies in Geneva Let me add a note of discord before Feyerabend sentimentality gets out of hand. His early work in my view was powerful and interesting, contributing to the dismantling of logical empiricism, and leaving the door open to a more naturalistic and historically realistic conception of science. But from Against Method on, his work instanciated little more than self-indulgent relativism. It is healthy to fart in church, when the object of that derision has undeserved prestige, or, even if deserved, is the object of an uncritical veneration. It would be absurd to claim that that is the status of the natural sciences in recent times. Many contributors to the list have complained about the incurability of crank views, their astounding prestige, and the utter ignorance of many of even elementary natural sciences. Some of this crankery is harmless; much of it is not: Creation Science, and New Age superstions of various stripes. Yet sentimental and respectful noises are being made about someone who advocated, as seriously as he advocated anything, chairs in astrology and no doubt, in creation science or crystal medicine too. Count me out. Kim Sterelny Philosophy Victoria University of Wellington