Abstract
Feyerabend declared the claim for the superiority of science an expression of cultural imperialism. This was but a teaser. He offered one unusual idea: legislation of a separation of science and state. The bandwagon effect of Bernard Shaw is the Matthew effect of Robert Merton. Its role is to keep establishments in power. Dislike for it raises Feyerabend’s popularity. His proposal to legislate a separation of science and state is in parallel to the proposal to separate church and state. That proposal is to limit the power of the church to the community; in parallel, the new proposal is to limit the power of the scientific establishment to the scientific community. The contrary idea of a state church should have as its parallel the idea of state science, as practiced in totalitarian regimes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Agassi, J., and Agassi, J. B. 1987. “Sexism in science” (review of Evelyn Fox Keller, Reflections on Gender and Science). Philosophy of the Social Sciences 17: 515–522.
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1987. Farewell to reason. London: Verso Books.
Fuller, Steve. 1997. The secularization of science and a new deal for science policy. Futures 29: 483–503.
Goswami, Manu. 1996. ‘Provincializing’ sociology: The case of the premature postcolonial sociologist. In Ross 1996: 145–168.
Haberer, Joseph. 1969. Politics and the community of science.
Hamm, Bernd and Russell Charles Smandych. 2005. Cultural imperialism: Essays on the political economy of cultural domination. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Jarvie, Ian C. 1970. Movies and society. New York: Basic Books.
Jensen, Arthur. 1969. How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement. Harvard Educational Review 39: 1–123.
Kaufmann, Walter. 1975. Without guilt and justice. New York: Dell Publishing.
London, Jack. 1909. Martin Eden. London: Penguin Books.
Lugg, Andrew. 1977. Feyerabend’s rationalism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7: 755–775.
Merton, Robert K. 1968. The matthew effect in science. Science 159: 56–63. (5 Jan 1968).
Oberheim, Eric. 2006. Feyerabend’s philosophy. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Polanyi, Michael. 2000. The republic of science: Its political and economic theory. Minerva 38: 1–21.
Price, Don K. 1962. Government and science: Their dynamic relation in american democracy. New York: New York University Press.
Ross, Andrew (ed.). 1996. Science wars. Durham: Duke University Press.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. 1956. Being and nothingness. United States: Philosophical Library.
Shaw, Bernard. 1911. Fanny’s first play. Paris: Brentano’s.
Velikovsky, Immanuel. 1983. Mankind in amnesia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Velikovsky#.22The_Velikovsky_Affair.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Agassi, J. (2014). Feyerabend’s Proposal. In: Popper and His Popular Critics. SpringerBriefs in Philosophy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06587-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06587-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-06586-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-06587-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)