The thesis focuses on the epistemological critique of the structural limitations of science concentrated in the comparative analysis of two authors - Tomas Kuhn and Paul Feyerabend. The first research question relates directly to the mentioned authors: what is the relation of Feyerabend's epistemological anarchism to Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions? In regard to this question I firstly present the main concepts of theories, which I then compare in the second part (analysis). In the diploma thesis, I establish that in spite of similar starting points, such as the holistic perspective of science, emphasizing the relativity of scientific experience, the importance of violating scientific rules, incomensurabillity and the cumulative nature of scientific development, Feyerabend's epistemological anarchism radicalises Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions. Furthermore the concept of incomensurability of scientific theories links the diploma thesis with the second research question: how to proceed against the hegemony of scientific knowleadge? By answering, thesis passes on to the ontological level, in which different scientific theories (paradigms) create separate worlds. With this thesis I reject the positivist thought of the strict objectivity of the facts and note that all data is inevitably related to theory. This is precisely what leads the diploma thesis to the political dimension of the problematization of the hegemonic production of a specific form of knowledge which subtends the experience to specific theory, paradigm, ideology. In determining the problem, at the very end, with the help of Boaventura de Sousa Santos and Feyerabend, the diploma paper concludes that we must oppose the hegemony of behavior with creativity and the production of alternative forms of knowleage.
|
