Philosophy of science without history of science is empty; history of science without philosophy of science is blind.

Lakatos saw himself as merely extending Popper's ideas which changed over time and were interpreted by many in conflicting ways. Therefore he fundamentally disagreed with the 'formalist' conception of proof which prevailed in Frege's and Russell's logicism which defines proof simply in terms of formal validity. " He argued that Lakatos's methodology was no different in practice from epistemological anarchism Feyerabend's own position.