An all-new version of the ILX code is being developed. You can test and comment at sandbox.ilxor.com.

RFI: Karl Popper's Open Society & Its Enemies

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Can someone tell me a bit about this work? I'm just beginning to read it, and I'm just curious about everybody's thoughts on this, or prehaps an intro to it.

It seems kinda...relevant, nowadays

― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 24 January 2006 17:39 (twenty years ago)

Basically - all famous thinkers throughout history are enemies of the open society. That was what I took from it.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Tuesday, 24 January 2006 17:58 (twenty years ago)

Really. that's it?

― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 24 January 2006 20:00 (twenty years ago)

Well... maybe it's just that the History of Political Thought course I did used it as one of the readings, and he was very down on Plato and Marx, and probably Machiavelli as well, and they were the only ones I looked at.

It is however possible I am imagining all this and I never actually opened the pages of this book.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 25 January 2006 10:56 (twenty years ago)

Nah, it's a fair summary. Utopian philosophers are bad, laissez-faire is great.

― 'Curt' Russell (noodle vague), Wednesday, 25 January 2006 11:46 (twenty years ago)

hegel = anti-christ

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Wednesday, 25 January 2006 12:25 (twenty years ago)

u cd say he took british anti-naturalist philosophy into political theory.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Wednesday, 25 January 2006 12:25 (twenty years ago)

So we've established he was a total dick then?

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Wednesday, 25 January 2006 12:30 (twenty years ago)

well... he needs to be answered. hegel was a dick, also.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Wednesday, 25 January 2006 12:35 (twenty years ago)

The big chunky chalk path between Bodhidharma, Hume, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Ayer and Derrida needs to be drawn out more carefully.

― 'Curt' Russell (noodle vague), Thursday, 26 January 2006 00:20 (twenty years ago)

eighteen years pass...

I don’t know how I ended up in this book at all, but it’s clear and very strong argumentation is pretty bracing. I am enjoying its clarity. Not done yet, I’m at the “why historicism is illegit” part in his evaluation and explanation of marx. This is a bit out of my depth, though I understand the arguments and have enough background study to get who and what he’s going on about. As one with good history education but not much of philosophy, I am quite surprised that many of his criticisms of parts of marx’s approach match my own heuristics re marx. i wonder how much of my general late 20th c education handed me popper’s argument without my real awareness of popper proper.

anyway, yeah, it’s interesting.

so far i didn’t get a sense of “laissez faire = good” so much as “the alternatives we got from plato and hegel are fascist for the former, and compromised, false, and self-interested for the latter.”

― well below the otm mendoza line (Hunt3r), Monday, 15 July 2024 20:25 (two years ago)

Lol “its”

― well below the otm mendoza line (Hunt3r), Monday, 15 July 2024 20:26 (two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.