Abstract
B. F. Skinner's work encompasses epistemological concerns, including discussions about methodology and truth criteria, along with political and social ones, concerning the relationship between science and society. From a speech, in some aspects, coincident with a kind of positivism, Skinner came to criticize purely formalist tendencies about scientific method, and from the defense of the management of society by experts, he came to a criticism of the centralization of power and to the proposal of a form of organization based on face to face control. Dealing with similar topics, Paul Feyerabend deconstructed the idea of a universal scientific method, denounced an oppressive potential of science, and claimed for scientific knowledge to have no inherent preference over other forms of knowledge to access to institutions of power. Considering the importance of both authors for the debates in the context of history and philosophy of science, this study aims to present and discuss aspects of Skinner's radical behaviorism and Feyerabend's epistemological anarchism that deal with common themes. We conclude that, although salient differences, both perspectives contain some convergent and virtually complementary propositions, whose dialogue could be useful to their pursuit of a free society.
Keywords:
Philosophy of science; B. F. Skinner; Paul Feyerabend; Radical behaviorism; Epistemological anarchism