How Should Feyerabend have Defended Astrology? A Reply to Pigliucci, Ian James Kidd

Opinions vary.

Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective

Author Information: Ian James Kidd, University of Nottingham, ian.kidd@nottingham.ac.uk

Kidd, Ian James. “How Should Feyerabend have Defended Astrology? A Reply to Pigliucci.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 5, no. 6 (2016): 11-17.

The PDF of the article gives specific page numbers. Shortlink: http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-31a

Please refer to:

celestial_globe

Image credit: Alan Bloom, via flickr

I am grateful to Massimo Pigliccui for his response to my paper,[1] the subject of which was Paul Feyerabend’s well-known, but poorly-understood “defences” of astrology, voodoo, and other “eccentric” beliefs, practices, and traditions. Like many modern Feyerabend scholars, my sense is that there is a lot of sense in the epistemic…

View original post 3,111 more words