What is abhorrent about pragmatism?
Even theories about theories are value-laden, it seems. I believe that the basis of the ‘abhorrence’ which Lakatos (and I believe Popper) felt for pragmatism – and all the other non-dogmatic ‘isms’ – arose from his fear of the (ab)use of power and politics to pervert science. We must remember the era – late sixties, early seventies, Chomsky liberalism, etc. Lakatos was a refugee from a culture in which science was used to justify and support an ideology and political policies based upon that ideology. And only scientific theories which did provide that support were accepted. Lysenkoism is perhaps the best known example in the West. Scientific knowledge was, in effect, determined by politicians. Dissenters were not tolerated. (Lest we think that such a situation pertains only in totalitarian states, consider whether Chomsky’s views on language are independent of, or influenced by, his liberal beliefs.) Lakatos was, I believe, wanting instead a ‘pure’ science, independent of politics, go
