From: michele.intorcia-AT-ntt.it
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 97 18:58:25 PDT
Subject: RE: PKF: Scientific Method? 


>Dear Michele
>Sorry but I must object to your comparison Feyerabend vs. E. v. Glasersfeld
>and Berger/Luckmann. The distinctions between them are so deep, that I 
>would
>affirm without much hesitation, that they are incomparable. Above all E. v.
>Glasersfeld is deeply confusing. His ideas may sound exciting, but they are
>bad philosophy and bad science. Nothing but tricky metaphors!
>Berger/Luckmann aren't much better.(Hope you don't get angry. This are only
>my opinions!)



"Ridere la verità" (Laugh the Truth) Umberto Eco-Il Nome della Rosa

Dear Cheers
thank you for your criticisms! 
I am not absolutely angry, even I am contented for your considerations.
Feyerabend has written:  "there is not no idea that doesn't go in shiver 
when comes examined in the details." This maybe also is worth for the ideas 
of Feyerabend.
You have told me that there are deep differences among Feyerabend, von 
Glaserfeld , etc., but you have not argued against my affirmations. I have 
not ever affirmed that they had told the same thing. I hope that you don't 
become angry.

Ciao! 
Michele

**********************************************************************
Contributions: mailto:feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: mailto:majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: mailto:feyerabend-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu