All people have his/her own uniqueness, special skills, and genuinity. The openness to others and the uniqueness of each one of us helps us to know others and to appreciate the being different and being unique of others. We all have our own paradigms and that shaped our lives for many years. The experiences that made us grow and the lessons we acquired from it, we make them our bases principles. It is hard for us to take them away and to cater other ways/paradigms the things that out of our paradigm something that is alien. We are being invited to consider others paradigm and to respect their own concept of life. Respect is important in the transcendence of self to others notion thus “anything goes” of Paul Feyerabend speaks to be acceptable or to be accommodating of others concept and be open to changes. Openness makes us to be open to possibilities and consider knowing the bright side of others paradigm. “Anything goes” should give us the mentality of being dynamic in our paradigms of life. It also means that we are not being choosy it is not being unfair but fair considering others.

The being dynamic and not being selfish of paradigm shifting respect and consider not only of thy self but to others who are also open in their concepts of life and to share what they have. As science is dynamic the shifting of paradigm is as developing and not being selfish. “Anything goes,” It is the giving off of oneself to the self of others that they are offering. This offering is kind, and with the openness of self affirmation or correction in the pairing of life in the course of paradigm shift. Here we can see the greatness of others not being selfish just only seeing my own and I’m the only correct. In this time many things that are existing from gadgets to the things that are brought by science. Material things are also important to the life of the people. The things that the science offers us are making our life convenient and to use the things we need thus progress is fast in this moment. The things we are using is the things that we really need yet there are more things are not that really our necessity just contingency, I’m not saying be still and let the pass pull you from the present and the future, we just need to see what are the things that are needed, but also the things that are new and good on this moment not just being stocked in the things that are used of. In the paradigm shifting our perspective in life becomes wider and our mind also becomes mature. In every shift that we make we should sure to live it and to be ready in the things that will be possibly come. I do not say that every time we see things that are new we will eventually change our paradigms, ofcruse we need to make sure the other concept or the things that we will consider is worthy and what we really need. “Anything goes” is not selfish it is the affirmation to others work or to the things that are being offered. Consideration is important because it is the act of the acceptance to others. It helps the person not to become selfish.

Anything goes is not selfish but it’s just a science.  Science must be without methods that will box the science that this should and only be solved by a specific method this only method. Science must be with development and with the opportunity to discover more. Science is fast that it is freely moving in the sense. Science is the improvement of mans activities it is the froof of the shifts of the scientists and other people who contributed in the field of development. Many people did not just leave the dependence of their achievements just practising the value of developing mind in the state of being a scientific person. Scientific personalities are creative and dynamic in mind not afraid in risks of shifting their paradigms. Life is not static it is moving the movement of that is rapidly catching the advancement of the science in the field of technology.

Let us not be scared in the changes that we are to face in the course of time we must start to accept the fast approach of the developing world. Let us shift to the dynamic life of persons who are open in the acceptance of others concept that we know we can get, wisdom and benefits from. We must be scientific in facing the truth in life that we must coup up in the demands of the world. We are hiding from the alleys that are dark we need to see what is beyond this dark place we need to open our eyes and face things in the state scientific preparedness. We can do this paradigm shifting we need to be ready in the things that we will face.

“I can acquire everything and it doesn’t mean that I’m selfish only that I’m open to all the possibilities along my way, because to be open for some changes adds more chapters in my life, in order for me to see my life in its clearer view. Life is a journey to discover and you are free to choose which route you should take, but just make it sure that you are in the right path. The journey of life doesn’t stop as long as it is in this world. I’m the captain of my soul and the master of my self, so why should I follow others if I know I could do something new?

Science is a method. It is a method because it has processes to be followed step by step. In fact, science is the mother of all inventions. Through science, man was able to reach the moon, man can communicate to others while they are from different places, man can easily gather information in just one click, man can now prolong life, etc. Science is vey powerful nowadays because of its inventions.

What if science only limited or focused itself in just one invention? For example:  After the invention of the space craft which was used by Neil Armstrong when he went to the moon, man already stopped from inventing other inventions. They only focused themselves on doing space craft (different space craft). They do not mind anymore to invent other thing that will help in developing faster communications, transportations, entertainments, etc. What do you think the possible things that will happen, especially during these days? Do you think we have this present world right now?

If the scientists during those times stops from doing another thing and focused only in doing the same invention, for me, it has a positive and negative effect in our society right now. It is positive, because if science stopped evolving, there is a possibility that we don’t have certain issues and problems that we are shouldering right now. First, if science stopped from inventing, there will be no contraceptive (RH Bill products) which makes complication between the church and state.  In increases the number of immorality in the society by leading the people to have an irresponsible freedom within them. Second, if science stopped from evolving, there must be no nuclear weapons and there will be no “nuclear war” in other nations. It is negative, because if science stops from inventing, there will be no solutions for the dangerous diseases. If science stopped from inventing, there will be no faster way of communication and convenient transportation. If science stopped from evolving, maybe we are not able to solve our problems before. If science stopped from exploring, maybe we are not able to know the world and even our selves.

The world of science is wide open. You can create so many varieties of ideas and methods.  According to Paul Fayereband, the scientist should explore more the world of science, make their own methods and not just continue what others have started already. A scientist should not pattern his thoughts from the others’ works. A scientist should not just limit himself on what are the given methods of science and even to his own methods. He is expected to create something new and not just the “falsified thing” from the others’ ideas. He must go out from the box (perspective of other scientist) and make his own method which is distinct from the others, because only by getting out from the box that he can create a new idea, fresh and original. 

Science can be developed in many ways and not just in continuing other’s work. There are still lots of discoveries waiting to be done and things that are not yet   discovered. Science is for everyone to discover and all we have to do is just to expand our imagination and widen more our perspective. A scientist should always stretch himself to the limits, because science is just like a horizon very wide and can’t be known if where its end is. 

An illustrious Chinese Philosopher said that, “You must be willing to go where you have never been, to create something you never had.” Why did those famous scientists and philosophers were able to come up with new thoughts either scholastic or simply life- enriching lessons?  Isn’t it that they were able to think outside of the box or thinking beyond the limits?

Our imagination is a horizon, it is boundless. Instead of thinking things that could make one’s life miserable, why should not utilize it to for betterment? Isn’t it that it is a better perspective of using this horizon?

There are times in life that we close ourselves in a certain framework that we tend to refuse a certain one. “Di ko sina ahhh, sang una amo malang ni, mayo man.” This is one of the many lines that we usually heard especially from our elders. There mindset are already set to what they used to do or practice even you offer still a better one. In doing things and responsibilities in life, we follow what is given to us by our superiors, people to whom we give our love , respect or we idolized but unknowingly this practice disparage our own capacity to think and to use our own senses and faculties, talents and abilities that could offer a better product to what we are aiming.

In our old folks, we usually heard from them that they are so many ways of killing a cat. Yes, it’s true and this is a true example of saying that anything goes, is not selfishness but scientific. I strongly believe that it is more scientific if we tend to follow the structure of “come what may” idea, not a “pabaya” one but open to all possibilities, exhausting all potentials of potentialities. In this kind of paradigm, we are more open- minded to all other changes and results and willing to accept criticisms for a deeper growth, and this is a better characteristic of being scientific. If the basis of being scientific is just a procedure, why limit yourselves for a narrow one. Isn’t it that it is irony to think that we could more if we don’t just settle in the field of mediocrity that oftentimes become the core reason of a limitless world?  Life is boundless field of an endless genesis. Exhaust it!

In the milieu of seminary formation, priest formators or even a brother seminarian would instill in us the power of courage because we are not yet pushing ourselves and placing it beyond the limits. I is a great possibility always that we think, that we are bound to a certain degree but the reversal truth is that, we could do a lot, a good one, a better one and the best one! Sometimes seminarians tend to refuse or get rid of what is being asked from them because it is what that was imbibed to them in the context of seminary formation. Life in the seminary is not just what is being imposed but a life that is full of adventure, discoveries and implications that surely will mold us to become a better person, a better Christian.

It is not selfishness if we pursue our own perspective beyond a limitless degree because it is a better approach to prove that we were also able to impart it to other people of the same level of consciousness that stabilizes the world of imagination. It is in a more selfish motivation in pat our own selves if we let what other people used to think of us revolve our world in that kind of paradigm. It is more self- denying to our part if we square it to a mindset that is not falsifiable so to say.

Anything goes, “Come what may”, is not a selfish paradigm but a deeper understanding of one’s life and capacity to extend a life open to what it offers, what it drives you and a life full of unending horizon, a field that never stops. It would never put into its end unless momentarily placed in the moment of death. Death is the end of all existent being.

A famous line from a song says, “As long as the stars shine down from the heaven, as long as the rivers run to the sea, I’ll never get over you, getting over me.” This line is an expression of life is an unending travel, a pilgrimage that opens a lot of chances to be done, to be implied and to embrace.

“Come what may ahh…because anything goes! Sapere Aude!

Science (not only refers to the study of physical and natural world) is a systematized body of knowledge about a particular subject. It is performed methodically. All sciences have methods. Method is the procedure one uses in achieving something. In approaching science, one has to pass to a procedure or a process that will lead him/r to achieve a result. Whatever the result of one’s action is, is just the consequence of the method or process s/he used. That is why method is important in science.

Because Aristotle saw the importance of method in science, he proposed to us what he called “Scientific Method.” By the word itself, for sure we can understand what it means.  Even though it has been a long time since he proposed it, his scientific method still makes sense until now. In fact it caused a lot of developments in science. Example if we talk about inventions, the inventor would deal first with methods before s/he can invent something. Without method, no process, no inventions. After him, Francis Bacon proposed that in order for us to be scientific, we must free ourselves from our “idols.” He called it “the theory of Idols”. Even though we will use scientific method but still we cannot overcome our biases, we can never achieve a good hypothesis. Our biases limit us. We must free ourselves from our idols in order to achieve a good hypothesis (a scientific guess not a guess that we force to be scientific.) After Bacon, Karl Popper proposed that we should prepare ourselves from any changes for time will come that other theories will be better than ours. We have nothing to do with it. What we can do is just to accept that others are better and greater than us. He called it “falsification.” As what I can see, this is the movement of science since before. It improves and improves. It will never stop improving. After Popper, Imre Lakatus would believe in the fact that because science is all about the methodologies, what we consider theories are not theories but just “slightly different theories.” These theories have their “hardcores” which refers not only in their commonalities, but in their points. He also proposed what he called “research programs” that will be the protection of their hardcores. For Lakatus, if we only look at the downside of things, we fail to appreciate their upsides. There is always better that what is ours but it doesn’t mean we should change from one thing to the other, from one theory to the other. We change if it cannot answer our needs. Even though there is falsification, we should consider that they have certain truths in them. We should appreciate them all for time will come that we will need them again. After Lakatus, Thomas Kuhn proposed about “paradigm shifting.” We can understand other’s point if we look at them the way they would look at things, the way they would look at reality. It is not about one is better than the other. They are just different, they are just unique. To make things clear, it is not about giving up the way you would look at things and follow the other. Our way of looking at things can be merge with the other. We only need to choose the upsides of both sides.

Science develops as time goes on. The movement of the philosophy of science is from scientific method to overcoming one’s biases to falsification to research programs in protecting the hardcore and to paradigm shifting. If we would get the upsides of these theories and apply them in life, for sure we can look at things in a wider perspective. After knowing those theories, the last philosopher of science we have discussed is against the first theory we have encountered in this subject which is the scientific method. He is Paul Feyerabend and he is against methodologies. He would believe that a scientist is not a scientist if s/he uses methods.  For him, methods will just limit us in achieving greater things, something that is beyond. What he meant is that, a true scientist goes beyond the box. For example, Joseph creates a new gadget. After one year, Keith creates the same gadget but it is more advanced and it is the falsified one. In this situation, we can see that Joseph was original in creating that gadget because his thinks outside the box. Keith did not think outside the box because the gadget he created was first created by Joseph. Joseph created that gadget to present something new. Keith’s creation is more of “beautifying” and adding something new to Joseph’s creation. The falsified one is of course more interesting in the eyes of the people and many will buy it. Feyerabend does not really mean not to use methods. For him, we should not use methods that are already objective. The method that we should use is something that is new. It is about going outside and beyond the box. In that way, we can present something new and unique to people which are original from us. That is why he is against in method and falsification. If we think outside the box always, we can be the best that we can be for we do not only limit ourselves from what is original from others but we create something that is unique. In that way, science continues to improve and present new data and information to the people.

In sciences and any researches, experiments are really important. Most scientists discover something new through accidents and they repeat it again and again until they can perfect it. Those accidents led them to a new discovery. Those discoveries were discovered because of the openness of the people behind them to accidents that in the end will give them a unique discovery at all. Now, we see the point of Paul Feyerabend. As a conclusion, we should go beyond the box for us to be the best that we can be. We can be the best that we can be only if we will not limit ourselves to what the present world is giving us. If we get the upsides of all the theories of the philosophers of science we have discussed in the class, we will not only look at the reality with a wider perspective, but also we can be the best that we can be!

Pabay-i lang ko bala, pagusto ko ya, may ara man ko ya nga akon. This statement, which we sometimes uttered, simply shows selfishness. However, if we think and go beyond about it, it simply tells us that all of us have our own perspective and views in life which we considered as different and unique from others. Anything goes is not selfish, it’s scientific. As what Paul Feyerebend stated and believed that in a scientific investigation and research there should be no methodological rules or methods to be followed by the scientist, because according to him if there is a method or structure being used, it would limit their activities. Meaning, in science it should be free thinking, no fixed structure or method, anyone could make and create his own method or formula. As a scientist, you should not only stick and fix on the method that everyone used to follow, but rather you have to go beyond, search for something new and unique which you think an effective one. I agree and in favor of what Paul Feyerebend believed to because having or creating a new method and not depending on what is being already used would lead into new discoveries which is unique. There is a progress, development would happen, particularly in the field of science.  It is important to have a s theoretical anarchism because if there is anarchism in theory, there is a big possibility that as a scientist ‘ sunod-sunod ka na lang sa kinagawian ukon sa tradisyon. It is just like you are being imprisoned in a box, no freedom, dependent, no changes, improvement and progress. If you do not have your own method, ‘mahulog ka sa isa ka objective nga panan-awan. There should be a subjective way of looking at things. Meaning, ‘indi magsunod sa nakasanayan ng sang tanan nga pamaagi, but rather you have to go beyond, think for something new, which is more effective, more efficient, unique and different. I believe there is a lot of development would happen in the world, there is a scientific progress, because you chose to make your own, lain. And of course, if you are able to establish your own method or procedure, you have to really justify and give valid reason for that. Anything goes is not about being selfish. It is all about call for progress, change and development. It is all about theoretical anarchism, if you want improvement, we have to disregard our cherish prejudices, discriminations and biases. I surely believe that there is a true development and progress in science if you as a scientist are willing and open nga maglain, mag go beyond, magpagusto.

If we are going to put and connect it in our seminary formation, particularly in our seminary structure, with regards on what Paul Referebend believed it would be applicable and effective. Our seminary has provided us a structure or a program for us to follow in order for us to have a better and effective seminary formation. However, as what I have observed, I believe there are some structures in our formation that are not functioning well. We have lot of programs but not properly and strictly observed. That is why, there are sometimes conflicts, disorders, inconsistency and arguments happened in the formation, specifically conflicts between the seminarians and priest formators. Thus, in this case, it simply shows a call for change, for improvement, growth and development. If we think or feel and it really shows that the seminary structure is not already in its order or effectiveness, I think, it is a time to make, formulate and construct a new one, which is unique and really functioning and working. We don’t have to stick and attach on what we have in our seminary structure if it is no longer working. We have to go beyond, make and justify for what we believe as effective and helpful in our seminary formation.