The Only Principle That Does Not Inhibit

Science Is An Essentially Anarchic Enterprise.

Unanimity Of Opinion May Be Fitting For A Church, For The Frightened Or Greedy Victims Of Some (ancient, Or Modern) Myth, Or For The Weak And Willing Followers Of Some Tyrant. Variety Of Opinion Is Necessary For Objective Knowledge. And A Method That Encourages Variety Is Also The Only Method That Is Comparable With A Humanitarian Outlook.

There Is No "scientific Worldview" Just As There Is No Uniform Enterprise "science" - Except In The Minds Of Metaphysicians, School Masters, And Scientists Blinded By The Achievements Of Their Own Particular Niche... There Is No Objective Principle That Could Direct Us Away From The Supermarket "religion" Or The Supermarket "art" Toward The More Modern, And Much More Expensive Supermarket "science." Besides, The Search For Such Guidance Would Be In Conflict With The Idea Of Individual Responsibility Which Allegedly Is An Important Ingredient Of A "rational" Or Scientific Age.

Rational Discourse Is Only One Way Of Presenting And Examining An Issue And By No Means The Best. Our New Intellectuals Are Not Aware Of Its Limitations And Of The Nature Of The Things Outside.

There Is No Coherent Knowledge , I.e. No Uniform Comprehensive Account Of The World And The Events In It. There Is No Comprehensive Truth That Goes Beyond An Enumeration Of Details, But There Are Many Pieces Of Information , Obtained In Different Ways From Different Sources And Collected For The Benefit Of The Curious. The Best Way Of Presenting Such Knowledge Is The List - And The Oldest Scientific Works Were Indeed Lists Of Facts, Parts, Coincidences, Problems In Several Specialized Domains.