I suppose it is too obvious that what I really mean is that some
not-so-smart people were influenced by Feyerabend in some really bad
ways. The editors of "Social Text", for example. And that git in the
Guardian who tried to justify the violent suppression of a play that
offended the sensibilities of some Sikhs on the grounds that "the
Sacred" was beyond reason, and "postmodernism" had shown that
rationality had no legitimate claim to be superior to irrationality.
Grrr.
Feyerabend argued that the uniqueness and privilege of science, of the
skeptical viewpoint, was incompatible with egalitarian principles: all
"traditions" must have an equal voice. That is, science - which is
radically egalitarian - must have an equal voice with all the cults
and sects and clerisies, with their atavistic power structures and
their insistence on the unquestioning veneration of the symbols
wielded by their authority figures. I do wonder what he was smoking,
really. But like I say, his autobiography's a good read.
Dominic
|