Feyerabend and Science Writes, "There Is No Valid Reason for Astron- Omers

universes are equally possible," Abdelkader Feyerabend and Science writes, "there is no valid reason for astron- omers ... to confine their attention exclu- ively to the study" of Copernican cosmology. Martin Gardner He is convinced that "the only way to ascer- tain conclusively which of the two vastly dif- Professor Feyerabend complains that I fo- of the Big Bang, may or may not be fruitful ferent universes is our actual one is by pierc- cused on his minor assertions, ignoring his (compelling evidence is too thin). But ing the earth vertically to a depth of 12,742 main arguments. Let me reply first with a astrology? Or the efficacy of rain dances? kilometers, a project which does not seem fable. Feyerabend repeatedly likens the science to be possible in the foreseeable future." Suppose an English professor of a dis- community to the Roman Catholic church I am not sure that drilling through the tinguished American university writes a big in the inflexibility of its dogmas. I can think earth would decide conclusively between the book about poetry, most of it devoted to the of no comparison less apt. The speed with two theories—there are clever ways to get sensible thesis that cultural forces strongly which modern science can overturn old around an unfavorable result by modeling condition literary tastes. A poet with a high dogmas and the zeal with which it tries to the cosmos in various kinds of closed reputation in one age is forgotten in the next, falsify present dogmas are awesome devel- hyperspace— but that is beside the point. The while poets considered minor are elevated to opments in human history. It was not until point is, does Feyerabend think Abdelkader top rank. We should, therefore, be humble 1980 that the Pope initiated an inquiry to is crazy? in our enthusiasms and recognize the ab- determine if the Inquisition acted properly If so, why? If the geocosmos is un- sence of ironclad rules for distinguishing be- in condemning Galileo. Einstein abandoned worthy of empirical testing, on what basis tween good poetry and doggerel. Dante and Newtonian physics, and quantum theory dis- is such a value judgment made? Should the Shakespeare are incommensurable. In carded classical causality, in just a few geocosmos be taught in Muslim universities poetry, anything goes. decades. How soon does Feyerabend expect as a serious and incommensurable rival to Mixed into these commonplace obser- the Roman church to discard the virgin birth Copernican cosmology? If not, why does vations are remarks in which the professor and the immaculate conception? Feyerabend think fundamentalist crea- berates his colleagues for their contemptuous Last week I was favored with a copy of tionism, with its flood theory of fossils, neglect of Edgar Guest and Ella Wheeler a paper by a Muslim scientist, Mostafa A. should be taught here in state-supported Wilcox. Why, he asks, are there no college Abdelkader, of Alexandria, scheduled to ap- schools? If the geocosmos doesn't go, why courses and Ph.D. theses devoted to the pear in a journal called Speculations in doesn't it go? And if it doesn't, what is wrong work of these two popular bards? Footnotes Science and Technology.* It is titled: "A with saying that competing theories are com- disclose that he has been reading Guest with Geocosmos: Mapping Outer Space into a mensurable, and that, although scientific gusto. On the book's flyleaf, under the Hollow Earth." No, it is not a joke. Mr. "truth" is pragmatic and hence fallible, there author's photograph, are these immortal Abdelkader revives an old hypothesis that the are excellent grounds for ruling out astrology lines by Eddie: earth is hollow and we live on the inside of as worthy of research. What is wrong with the shell, but he defends it with remarkable maintaining that there is such a thing as "well If it's worth while and you're sure of the sophistication. First he performs a geometri- founded knowledge," or that the history of right of it, cal inversion of conventional spacetime that scientific theories displays rational progress Stick to it, boy and make a real fight of it! exchanges every point believed by establish- of a sort qualitatively unlike progress in ment cosmologists to lie outside the earth metaphysics and the arts? Can you blame a reviewer for ignoring with a point inside. Then he adjusts all Feyerabend accuses me of statistical the book's broad conventional arguments to physical laws accordingly. Straight rays of fudging when I say that "most philosophers" concentrate on the author's eccentric tastes? light become circular arcs, and the speed of do not buy his extreme relativism. It is true Similarly with Feyerabend. Of course any- light decreases as it gets closer to the center that I cited only four thinkers (Feyerabend thing goes in science if this means that stan- of the hollow earth. All galaxies hitherto con- forgot about Thomas Kuhn and Ernest dards, theories, and observing instruments sidered enormous become microscopic ob- Nagel), but I know many other philosophers constantly change and that there is no way jects inside, much smaller than the moon. personally who, although they have not to foresee how they will change. It is hard to Everything appears to us exactly as we in fact published anything about Feyerabend, have predict, Bohr once said, especially the future. see it. The great merit of this inside-out a much lower opinion of him than I have. And who today wants to deny that social and cosmology, the Egyptian scientist maintains, If Feyerabend doubts my "most," let him hire political forces play roles in shaping science? is that it relieves us of the anxiety of believ- an impartial pollster to sample the opinions Everything human beings do is something ing in a universe of such fantastic size that of one hundred leading philosophers. In view human beings do, and therefore is part of our earth becomes infinitesimal. of his repeated insistence that all living culture. These are views John Dewey took It is not easy to see how the geocosmos philosophers of science except himself are in- for granted. And Russell and Carnap and can be falsified. Indeed, its logical consis- competent, it seems odd that he would ex- Popper. But it does not follow from these tency raises deep questions about the role of pect the outcome of such a poll to contradict views that competing theories are incommen- convention in cosmology. "Since both my estimate. surable and that "everybody's judgment is as Although there is nothing in Feyera- good as everybody else's." *Speculations in Science and Technology is an bend's response that he has not said over and It is here, where Feyerabend pushes his Australian journal, now in its sixth year, "devoted over and over again, I am surprised by the relativism to extremes, that he starts to ped- to speculative papers in the physical, mathematical, uncharacteristic mildness of his ad hominem biological, medical and engineering sciences." dle nonsense. We all know that a wild theory, Fey- remarks tossed my way. It makes it a plea- erabend is on its editorial board. such as Alan Guth's new inflationary model sure to exchange banter with him. •

Summer 1983 59