Title: Criticism of science - Wikipedia
Headings: Criticism of science
Criticism of science
Contents
Philosophical critiques
Epistemology
Ethics
Critiques from within science
Reproduciblity
Cognitive and publication biases
Feminist critiques
Language in science
Media and politics
See also
Notes and references
Further reading

Content: Contents
1 Philosophical critiques
1.1 Epistemology
1.2 Ethics
2 Critiques from within science
2.1 Reproduciblity
2.2 Cognitive and publication biases
3 Feminist critiques
3.1 Language in science
4 Media and politics
5 See also
6 Notes and references
7 Further reading
Philosophical critiques
"All methodologies, even the most obvious ones, have their limits." ― Paul Feyerabend in Against Method
Philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend advanced the idea of epistemological anarchism, which holds that there are no useful and exception-free methodological rules governing the progress of science or the growth of knowledge, and that the idea that science can or should operate according to universal and fixed rules is unrealistic, pernicious and detrimental to science itself. Feyerabend advocates a democratic society where science is treated as an equal to other ideologies or social institutions such as religion, and education, or magic and mythology, and considers the dominance of science in society authoritarian and unjustified. He also contended (along with Imre Lakatos) that the demarcation problem of distinguishing science from pseudoscience on objective grounds is not possible and thus fatal to the notion of science running according to fixed, universal rules. Feyerabend also criticized science for not having evidence for its own philosophical precepts. Particularly the notion of Uniformity of Law and the Uniformity of Process across time and space, as noted by Stephen Jay Gould. " We have to realize that a unified theory of the physical world simply does not exist" says Feyerabend, "We have theories that work in restricted regions, we have purely formal attempts to condense them into a single formula, we have lots of unfounded claims (such as the claim that all of chemistry can be reduced to physics), phenomena that do not fit into the accepted framework are suppressed; in physics, which many scientists regard as the one really basic science, we have now at least three different points of view...without a promise of conceptual (and not only formal) unification". In other words, science is begging the question when it presupposes that there is a universal truth with no proof thereof. Historian Jacques Barzun termed science "a faith as fanatical as any in history " and warned against the use of scientific thought to suppress considerations of meaning as integral to human existence.