I Do Not See Why I Should

Every Profession Has An Ideology And A Drive For Power That Goes Far Beyond Its Achievements And It Is The Task Of Democracy To Keep This Ideology And This Drive Under Control. Science Is Here No Different From Other Institutions.

One Knows Quite Well That Harmony Can Be A Harmony Of Appearances.

Science Is Only ‘one’ Of The Many Instruments People Invented To Cope With Their Surroundings. It Is Not The Only One, It Is Not Infallible And It Has Become Too Powerful, Too Pushy And Too Dangerous To Be Left On Its Own.

Given Any Rule, However "fundamental" Or "necessary" For Science, There Are Always Circumstances When It Is Advisable Not Only To Ignore The Rule, But To Adopt Its Opposite. For Example, There Are Circumstances When It Is Advisable To Introduce, Elaborate And Defend Ad Hoc Hypotheses, Or Hypotheses Which Contradict Well-established And Generally Accepted Experimental Results, Or Hypotheses Whose Content Is Smaller Than The Content Of The Existing And Empirically Adequate Alternative, Or Self-inconsistent Hypotheses, And So On.

It Is Often Assumed That Science Starts From Facts And Eschews Counter-factual Theories. Nothing Could Be Further From The Truth. What Is One Of The Basic Assumptions Of The Scientific World-view? That The Variety Of Events That Surrounds Us Is Held Together By A Deeper Unity.