re sloppy science

[Gillies, Lindsay]

>Bonnie:
>This line on "sloppy science" never ceases to amaze/confound/confuse me.
>For Pynchon's deployment of science in his work seems well-conceived, to
>me.  He does not overwhelm.  Rather, in deference to an audience most
>likely knowledgeable of the principles he "uses" only in the most
>rudimentary ways, he speaks as a human voice calling up what
>oversimplified, overgeneralized versions at his disposal.  Isn't this how
>we "use" science?  [...] Then there's the concept of science itself as 
socially
>embedded [...]
 -----------------------------
Like dropping a peculiar gem into this bottomless well of an argument about 
"science vs.", I'd mention the philosopher Paul Feyerabend.  His book 
_Against Method_ contains a number of papers that argue in various ways for 
the completely social nature of all scientific "method".  A more recent 
publication I'm aware of but haven't read is _Three Dialogues on Knowledge_, 
which I gather is a work of epistemology rather than philosophy of science. 
 I remember that in the late 70's there was no one more likely to inflame 
the "hard science" wing of the philosophy of science world than 
Feyerabend...