Epistemological Anarchism was adapted by Austrian philosopher Paul Karl Feyerabend.
The theory essentially said that we cannot allow the structure of science to constrict us from coming to newfound grounds of answers and realization. The fixed universal rules of science will only harm and/or prevent the scientist from coming to conclusion in an unrealistic way. As a figure of scientific philosophy, Feyerabend’s rationale explains, “The theory draws on the observation that there is no identifiable fixed scientific method that is consistent with the practices of the paradigm of scientific progress – the scientific revolution.” The idea is to keep the ball of science rolling by having it subjective to the scientist. Objectivity translates only as individual creativity blocks. He also spoke on how society varying on the time of study could affect the outcome, explaining, ” Galileo for example, relied on rhetoric, propaganda and epistemological tricks to support his doctrine of heliocentrism, and that aesthetic criteria, personal whims and social factors were far more prevalent than the dominant historiographies allowed.”
I personally believe that scientific law keeps our studies on a more logical and rational route. But in saying that, I think we need to keep our creativity, and use it as a tool to take us to new depths in the world of science. Do not allow the structure of science to constrict you, but simply see them as guidelines. Without them, I foresee erratic studies, making it only more difficult to come to a conclusion.