The Validity Of Usefulness, Adequacy

One Might Get The Impression That I Recommend A New Methodology Which Replaces Induction By Counterinduction And Uses A Multiplicity Of Theories, Metaphysical Views, Fairy Tales, Instead Of The Customary Pair Theory/observation. This Impression Would Certainly Be Mistaken. My Intention Is Not To Replace One Set Of General Rules By Another Such Set: My Intention Is Rather To Convince The Reader That All Methodologies, Even The Most Obvious Ones, Have Their Limits.

I Do Not See Why I Should Be Polite To Tyrants, Who Slobber Of Humanitarianism And Think Only Of Their Own Petty Interests.

The Validity Of Usefulness, Adequacy Of Popular Standards Can Be Tested Only By Research That Violates Them.

It Is Clear, Then, That The Idea Of A Fixed Method, Or Of A Fixed Theory Of Rationality, Rests On Too Naive A View Of Man And His Social Surroundings. To Those Who Look At The Rich Material Provided By History, And Who Are Not Intent On Impoverishing It In Order To Please Their Lower Instincts, Their Craving For Intellectual Security In The Form Of Clarity, Precision, "objectivity," "truth," It Will Become Clear That There Is Only One Principle That Can Be Defended Under All Circumstances And In All Stages Of Human Development. It Is The Principle: Anything Goes.

Given Any Rule, However �fundamental� Or �necessary� For Science, There Are Always Circumstances When It Is Advisable Not Only To Ignore The Rule, But To Adopt Its Opposite.