Paul Feyerabend's 'Against Method' argued that no universal scientific method exists. Successful science has violated every proposed methodological rule at various points—Galileo used rhetoric and propaganda alongside observation; Darwin's theory initially lacked the genetic mechanism it needed. Feyerabend concluded that 'anything goes' methodologically. Critics argue this overstates the case: while no single rule is inviolable, scientists do distinguish legitimate from illegitimate methods within their fields.
Based on the passage, it can be inferred that
all philosophers agree that a single universal scientific method exists
scientists never violate any methodological rules
Feyerabend believed strict methodological rules were essential to science
debates about methodology may exist on a spectrum between rigid rules and complete relativism
Correct Answer: D
Choice D is the best answer. The passage presents positions ranging from no rules to field-specific standards.
- Context clues: Feyerabend says "anything goes"; critics say scientists "distinguish legitimate from illegitimate" within fields.
- Meaning: These positions suggest a spectrum from complete flexibility to some standards.
- Verify: The debate structure implies intermediate positions between extremes.
đź’ˇ Strategy: When extreme positions are challenged, the inference often involves acknowledging a middle ground.
Choice A is incorrect because Feyerabend argued "no universal scientific method exists." Choice B is incorrect because "successful science has violated every proposed methodological rule." Choice C is incorrect because Feyerabend argued the opposite—"anything goes."