"Rational reconstructions" take "basic scientific wisdom" for granted, they do not show that it is better than the "basic wisdom" of witches and warlocks.

The idea that science can, and should, be run according to fixed and universal rules, is both unrealistic and pernicious. It is unrealistic, for it takes too simple a view of the talents of man and of the circumstances which encourage, or cause, their development. And it is pernicious for the attempt to enforce the rules is bound to increase our professional qualifications at the expense of our humanity.

Feyerbend's main contention was that Science does not in fact have a specific methodology associated with it and cannot necessarily claim to be superior to other fields on methodological grounds alone. The claim that such a specifically scientific methodology exists is taken to be unfounded and dogmatic. Propagating such a view restricts the freedom of the individual by locking him or her into a belief system comparable to a religion. This argument is supported by case studies taken from the history of physics, aimed at showing "All methodologies have their limitations and the only "rule" that survives is "anything goes"".