Against Feyerabend

Abstract

“… the propaganda which is termed ‘argumentation’” ² — A debate with a Dadaist is not without its dangers, for if you take him or her seriously, you are the very least in danger of making a laughing stock out of yourself. “The Dadaist’s favorite pastime is confounding rationalists by inventing compelling reasons for irrational theories”.³ One might be inclined to dismiss Feyerabend as a philosophical clown — “it is jokes, entertainment, and illusion that are liberating, and not ‘truth’”⁴ — were it not for the fact that he is not amusing enough to fit the role. If you criticize him in such a way as to annoy him, then you know what to expect: namely to be classified as a “someone who reads only on Sundays”, an “illiterate”, or a “propagandist”.⁵ (I myself prefer to be classified as a “Sunday reader”, for I like reading on Sundays and refuse, furthermore, to read everything that Feyerabend has written since Against Method). Incidentally, since when is the term “propagandist” used as a reproach? “Argument is propaganda for one observer, the essence of human discourse for another”.⁶ (Yes, of course I’m quoting out of context!) After all, Feyerabend himself engages in propaganda — he calls for “citizens initiatives instead of a theory of knowledge”, for example although on occasion he himself is prepared to argue a case, and with particular virtuosity when it comes to ensuring the immunity of his own position.