Now I’m no expert on these guys outside of bits and pieces. But they all inhabit basically the same space:
There is something wrong with the way we think of science and it needs to be fixed.
They’re all philosophers of science. Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos, Feyerabend.
They could all be considered postmodernist because they all were critical of the “received ways” of modernism.
Feyerabend was an extreme relativist and made a great paper enemy (paper tiger?) but had no lasting influence except as The Official Enemy Of Science.
Lakatos has been very influential in how science think of itself as a community. He was a “scientific anarchist” like Feyerabend but not a relativist. In anarchy, you can create communities but the point is you can write the rules and agree to them.
Kuhn brought the notion of revolution to scientific progress, which has been very popular in how science is taught as a creative force for society.
Popper was an opponent of logical positivism. He “repudiated the classical observationalist/inductivist form of scientific method in favor of empirical falsification”
All four were philosophers of science