Against Method. Is the approach to science a valid form of inquiry Essay

Against Method. Is the approach to science a valid form of inquiry - evidence ExamplePaul Feyerabends Against Method challenges modern science in various aspects. He believes that coeval science has been unchallenged for many years, and its methodologies and assumptions require to be reviewed.He asserts that mass can comprehend scientific advances by focusing in historical contexts. He analyzes how the philosophy of science has constantly oerstressed on practice over method, and believes the potentiality of anarchism replacing rationalism in the field theory of knowledge. Moreover, the American experience movie by Kinsey (2005) explores American sexuality in rather a sloppy and a bit unscientific manner. He swindles the issues of the ignorance of American undergraduate concerning sex in his documentary. Therefore, both Kinsey and Feyerabend argon massive in going against the contemporary scientific methods, to highlight their topics and make their stance concerning the production of knowledge. Those refuting the arguments of Feyerabend claim that he opportunistically redefines science between cognitive process and institution for his own benefits. They claim that he constructs a straw man from the notions that science is based in creating facts as rather than on models. However, as someone who was captivated by the notion of rationality and its coefficient of correlation to method, Feyerabend constructed a strong case against the belief that there was a correct technique, which people can send in the production of scientific knowledge. Therefore, he strongly opposed methods in every form and promoted an anarchistic stance concerning the production of scientific knowledge (Brace, 1). ... He chief idea was that immediately after people form a definition of a method they should as well define the constitutes of the correct flair of carrying out activities, which involves practicing limit of both what they can obtain and themselves. This is because a certai n method, which has accompanying, measures of success, roots to given consequences. According to Feyerabend, this mover that the consequences of methods are both limiting and oppressive. Thus, when scholars or scientists are permitted to assess the world in an established manner, they centralise the potentiality of finding novel comprehensions and explanations, which might be more informative and richer (Brace, 1). Critics argue that Feyerabend does not tackle critical factors if his notions were to be taken seriously. They argue that he is famous because he ignores the question of what makes a scientific result better than other results because his argument only states that scientific results do not always result in better outcomes. However, Feyerabend argues that this aspect does not necessarily result to better results because sometimes people are dealing with a certain given aspect rather than a universal notion. The arguments of Feyerabend are presumable in the scientific d ocumentary Kinsey whereby the role of science in inquiry and inquiry itself is explored. As aforementioned, it is argued that Feyerabend was against the lotion of methods in science. This was with the aim of avoiding scientific pretentions, which were observable in the scientific scenario. For instance, in the aforementioned film, it appears that the scientific admit of Kinsley was motivated by his childhood experiences ( Goodman and Maggio). The struggles of the protagonist in the early stages of his