We show that knowledge is inherently and sustainably pluralistic. Against the ideas espoused by Karl Popper, we explain that pluralism is a resource which we definitely need today. In particular we reject the idea that severe tests can select from several interpretations of the measured facts a "better understanding" that can claim the rank of provisional truth. In the first part we focus on the original and fundamental importance of interpretation in the production of knowledge and we discuss the distrust that appeared to him at the time of birth of discursive logic. This fear of interpretation becomes a casus belli in the work of Popper that we analyze in a second part . The last part is devoted to the description of the pluralistic science and why it is the tool of knowledge needed in our time.
