Kuhn vs Popper - About James H. Collier

The above pattern of response is familiar fromthe annals of cross-cultural rationality – thoughnormally it is associated with the superstitiousbeliefs of primitive tribes. For example, anthropologistshave no problem demonstrating thesocially stabilising function of rain dances, giventhe vast symbolic structures that have been erectedaround these rituals. The ‘irrationality’ of suchpractices, however, lies in their continuation evenafter the natives learn that the dances are at bestaccidentally connected to anything that mightreliably bring about rain. In other words, thenatives fixate on the rain dance itself rather thanshift their attention to other practices that mightbetter achieve what the rain dance sets out to do.When Popperian anthropologists like ErnestGellner and Ian Jarvie first made these observationsin the 1960s, they were criticised for harbouring theWestern assumption that a rain dance has valueonly as a means for bringing about, or at leastpredicting, rain. On the contrary, it was argued,the dance’s primary value may be precisely itsintegrative force in the society practising it, whichin turn explains why the natives are wise not toquestion its foundations, as the Popperians wouldhave them do.Whatever one wishes to make of this response tothe Popperians, it would be odd if we were forced to198