This work engages in a reductio ad absurdum argument which culminates in the principle "anything goes," and it was originally intended to be half of a debate with Imre Lakatos.
One section of this work cites the irregular motion of the planets in the time of Plato in arguing against a distinction between the "context of discovery" and the "context of justification." Its author vehemently attacked criticism of this book in a section of his next work entitled "Conversations with Illiterates." It highlights the rationality of the "tower argument" and of the views of the Catholic Church in arguing that Galileo managed to advance Copernican ideas more through political notions and psychological tricks than through rationality. This work engages in a reductio ad absurdum argument which culminates in the principle "anything goes," and it was originally intended to be half of a debate with Imre Lakatos. It was followed up by its author's Science in a Free Society, and advocates his position of "epistemological anarchism" in arguing that prescriptivist rules hamper the free flow of theories and ideas that makes science work. For 10 points, name this magnum opus of Paul Feyerabend.
One section of this work cites the irregular motion of the planets in the time of Plato in arguing against a distinction between the "context of discovery" and the "context of justification.
Against {Method}