ok in my philosophy course we just started studying science and my teacher is TELLING us that the scientific method is WRONG. I asked him how and he says that because it doesn't work leads to wrong answers etc. etc. he pointed out about how we didn't know about organisms that can live smaller than amino acids? (idk the truth in this so w/e lets just assume its true it can work with just about anything found wrong with scientific theories) He states that since this new 'fiddly bit' doesn't fit the previous knowledge we disregard it. naturally i pointed out that that would go against the scientifc method AS WELL as the fact that we found new knowledge that does not fit our models doesn't disprove the METHOD it contradicts the THEORY. So he made us read Thomas Kuhn on scientific revolution... I pointed out how Kuhn PROVES my point about the paradigms being incorrect and not the method but that's when he said that the METHOD itself IS a paradigm... so i told him that sure you can say that but its also a self proving paradigm... the very fact that you can arrive at true answers using the method proves it works its just we as humans always somehow mess it up... So he then just told me i was missing the point and that i had already had my own answer and just wouldn't accept what he's saying... but i REALLY did think it through ... could someone clarify wtf he is trying to tell me why it's correct and maybe an alternative method to aquiring knowledge ?