{"id":117,"date":"2013-02-06T22:37:14","date_gmt":"2013-02-06T21:37:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pkfeyerabend.org\/?page_id=117"},"modified":"2026-03-09T20:43:05","modified_gmt":"2026-03-09T19:43:05","slug":"paul-k-feyerabend","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.pkfeyerabend.org\/en\/paul-k-feyerabend\/","title":{"rendered":"Paul K. Feyerabend"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Paul-berkeley\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Paul Karl Feyerabend<\/strong> (January 13, 1924 \u2013 February 11, 1994) was one of the most thought-provoking philosophers of science of the 20th Century. Born and raised in Vienna, he worked as professor of philosophy. He held many, often simultaneous, appointments at academic institutions over three continents, including the University of Bristol (1955-58), Stanford University (1967), the London School of Economics (1967), the Free University of Berlin (1968), Yale University (1969), the University College of London (1967-1970), the University of Auckland (1972, 1974), the University of Sussex (1974-1975) and the University of Kassel (1977). Most notably, he taught for over three decades at the University of California at Berkeley (1958\u20131990) and for more than a decade at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich (1980-1991).<\/p>\n

In his formative years, Paul Feyerabend enjoyed personal contacts with leading representatives of contemporary philosophy of science, such as former members of the Vienna Circle and Karl Popper, but also prominent scientists such as Erwin Schr\u00f6dinger and David Bohm. He was then a prolific writer on theoretical and epistemological issues of quantum physics and mathematics. Over the years, he grew gradually critical of philosophy of science, gaining a controversial fame among some of his colleagues while becoming well known by the general public for his \u2018methodological anarchism\u2019. Based on his studies of history of science, Feyerabend rejected all rationalist attempts at identifying and codifying any one<\/em> scientific method. He also discussed and questioned the idea that scientific research univocally aims at finding the \u2018Truth\u2019. His major work \u2013 Against Method<\/em> (1975) \u2013 and his collections of essays, including Science in a Free Society<\/em> (1978), Farewell to Reason<\/em> (1987), Conquest of Abundance<\/em> (1999) and Philosophical Papers<\/em> (four volumes: 1981, 1999, 2016) have been widely diffused and translated in dozens of languages. They made him an influential figure in both philosophy of science and sociology of scientific knowledge.<\/p>\n

Paul Feyerabend offered a historically grounded critiques of na\u00efve empiricism (e.g., the idea that scientific theories are based upon \u2018independently meaningful facts\u2019) and its petrification in methodological theories. He introduced the concept of \u2018incommensurable\u2019 theories (i.e., theories not based on the same universal principles) and\u2014 of more direct social value\u2014 demolished the dogma of a system of rules strictly binding valuable scientific practice.\u00a0 As demonstrated by history, sciences thrive when theories, hypotheses, and methodological approaches do proliferate, not when they are confined into theoretical cages. Feyerabend made clear that all methodologies have their limits, that scientists are not \u2018rule followers\u2019 but opportunists, and that the only methodological principle that does not inhibit progress is \u201canything goes\u201d. \u00a0It follows that the views of the sciences of the day should not tyrannize people in the name of a supposed \u2018higher rationality\u2019 but adjust and respond to the values and inclinations of relevant cultural traditions. While Feyerabend\u2019s call to democratize the sciences is clear, he also came to critically assess the idea that cultural traditions can be unambiguously identified.\u00a0 Thus, far from a strong relativist position, he argued that \u201cpotentially every culture is all cultures\u201d, which some commentators see as a strong ground for his \u2018humanitarianism\u2019.\u00a0 Inseparable to that, however, he maintained though life a deep appreciation of epistemic and cultural diversity.<\/p>\n

Feyerabend\u2019s defence of the pluralistic character of the sciences, arising from both the diverse values and concerns of human beings and the complexity of the natural world, is developed in Conquest of Abundance<\/em>, published incomplete and posthumous in 1999. \u00a0Perceptive readers find there a defence of pluralism<\/strong> (of theories, methods, cultural traditions, and overall views of the world) that is \u2018liberating\u2019 against any form of totalitarianism or intellectual or ideological hegemony and supportive of the variety of experiences by which human beings make sense of the world (\u201creal is what plays an important role in the kind of life one wants to live<\/strong>\u201d).\u00a0 For Feyerabend, the essence of \u2018Being\u2019 may well be ineffable and unknowable, but the richness, abundance and diversity of human experiences, and the tolerance and openness that make those possible, are necessary for human thriving.\u00a0 In fact, the conditions for human thriving\u2014 not intellectual pursuit\u2014 were his main concern.<\/p>\n

Paul Feyerabend was an insatiable reader and prolific correspondent\u2014 many of his reviews and exchanges with key personalities of the last Century are available in print and several volumes of his correspondence are under publication. Volume 1 Feyerabend Formative Years: Feyerabend and Popper<\/em> has appeared in 2020. His early work Philosophy of Nature<\/em> has been published and translated posthumously (2009, 2014, 2016). \u00a0 A rich account of his unconventional life is offered by his autobiography Killing Time<\/em> (1994) and excerpts from some recorded messages to his wife (Stories from Paolino\u2019s Tapes<\/em>, 2001) still convey \u201c\u2026his love of opera, theatre, cinema and the respect, compassion, admiration and sense of wonder he felt for many people\u201d.\u00a0 His multifaceted personality was well summarized in the obituary written for him by Ian Hacking<\/a>: “Humanists, in my old-fashioned sense, need to be part of both arts and sciences. Paul Feyerabend was a humanist. He was also fun.” \u00a0In line with this humanistic interpretation and the concerns apparent in his later work, the Paul K. Feyerabend Foundation<\/a> was founded\u2014 in 2006\u2014 in his honour.<\/p>\n

A website dedicated to the centenary of Paul K. Feyerabend\u2019s birth, listing commemorative events, publications, videoconferences and much more, is available here:\u00a0 https:\/\/www.pkfcentennial.org\/<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Some links about Paul and his work :<\/span><\/p>\n