| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amazon.co.uk Trade-In Store
Did you know you can trade in your old books for an Amazon.co.uk Gift Card to spend on the things you want? Visit the Books Trade-In Store for more details. Learn more. |
Product details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Just when Lakatos has pulled the rug out from under the demarcation problem, Feyerabend's brief paper provides a whistlestop tour of epistemological anarchism and why the lack of answers isn't such a bad thing after all. Although it would have been nice to see more of Feyerabend's work included (there are many smaller contributions to other books to choose from), the effect is again to provoke apoplectic Popperians and those nodding sagely in agreement alike to seek out more.
The real treat in this work, though, and that which makes up the bulk of it, is the correspondence between the two, lovingly arranged by Motterlini. Even the most rabidly anti-Feyerabendian reader cannot fail to be disarmed by their wit and this touching insight into the deep friendship between the two. Feyerabend had prepared his Against Method specifically for Lakatos, with the latter to fire off a rejoinder soon thereafter. It is obvious both in these letters and throughout his published work that Feyerabend considered Lakatos the finest thinker in the philosophy of science of their time and the admiration was both mutual and genuine. Nevertheless, while plenty of space is devoted to the arranging of their contest in print, the majority of the letters is made up of their amusing observations on the personalities of the time and - most importantly - girls.
Both men subordinated philosophy and science to their rightful positions and preferred to talk about girls they had met and the myriad buffooneries they and their fellows had engaged in. It quickly becomes obvious that priorities are important in the life of an academic: many letters consist in the sentiment "i'll annihilate your nonsense later, my dear Imre, but first i must tell you about a girl i met yesterday...", and when the expected discussion of research programmes fails to arrive until weeks later it is scarcely missed by the reader.
There are more than enough serious aspects to the letters to interest the scholar: both men were teaching through the period of student protests and offer their opinions of the actions of all parties concerned. Feyerabend considered Lakatos' research programmes to be either so vague as to be content-free or so shorn of methodological rules that there was little to choose between the two anarchists, as he styled them. Such remarks provoked Lakatos to try again and the reader can easily suspect that the latter was beginning to agree with his friend. The final letters recount Lakatos' early death which clearly devastated Feyerabend and which - on the evidence of his autobiography - he never really recovered from, documenting more than anything the regard in which Lakatos was held by his contemporaries and Feyerabend's suspicion that he would never again find an opponent worthy of his talents.
I recommend this book to anyone who reads this brief review because it exemplifies the kind of interaction i aspire to in philosophical discussions and elsewhere in life. Feyerabend and Lakatos began by disagreeing strongly about the lessons to be learned from the history and philosophy of science but came to realise that their friendship transcended all of it. Philosophy is something to do when we run out of girls (or boys) to talk about and disagreement is the perpetual aim of friends who care more about their opponent than some vague claim to being right.
Why 'was'? Well, the correspondence that takes up most of this book is funny, personal, warm and caring. If you're looking for clarification of the thinkers, look elsewhere. Each letter will start "Dearest Imre/Paul, I just got your last article and am going to send you one of mine. Let's get together in Boston next week. By the way, I've something nasty to say about Popper/Kuhn/Searle. Take care, Imre/Paul." Not very insightful. To be sure, these letters ARE EXTREMELY ENTERTAINING and insightful into each thinker's personality. For instance, from reading this, it is easy to see that a large reason Feyarabend was a scientific 'anarchist' is because he loved to disagree with everyone and taking sides meant he had to agree with someone, thus spoil his devilish fun. In Lakatos, I see someone who wished he could be Feyerabend but could never shake that bugbear called common sense. As I said - insightful into each personality, not each philosophy.
There were, however, other parts of the book. The most educational was the opening dialogue (actually written by Matteo Matterlinski) where Feyerabend and Lakatos lay out their views and criticize the other's. Next, we have the Lakatos lectures which spend 7/8ths of the time reviewing other people's views and only then explaining his own (very badly, I may add). The two appendices were interesting. Lakatos and Feyerabend wrote on their views towards academic freedom. As one may expect, Lakatos is the more conservative here.
Still, I must give three stars as the correspondence was a treat to read. It will have you laughing, shaking your head and oddly enough, coming away with HUGE amounts of respect for both thinkers as their playful intellectual jabs at eachother and willingness to be on the recieving, as well as the giving, end, exemplify how all sciences should conduct themselves.
The Lakatos-Feyerabend correspondence is interesting. These were surely very special guys. Feyerabend, strange as it may seem, stands out as the meeker of the two; for Lakatos is pure cunning. Their exchange of opinions and invectives over Feyerabend's "Against Method" are worth reading ("Against Method" is worth reading along with this book, as a matter of fact).
Feyerabend compares the trio Popper-Lakatos-Feyerabend with Kant-Hegel-Lenin. I guess Popper himself might have thought this comparison quite fair.
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|