|
Loading... The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume I: The Spell of Platoby Karl Popper
LibraryThing recommendationsMember recommendationsLoading...
won't like
will probably not like
will probably like
will like
will love Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book. This first part of The Open Society and its Enemies is a very fine piece of work. I was new to Popper, and found his attack on Plato very persuasive. The poisonous nature of the Platonic antipathy to change and desire for ‘perfection’, and the multifarious tyrannies produced by its influence, are elucidated effectively, and the falseness and staggering vanity of Plato’s project exposed. When Popper was writing, the targets of the second volume – Hegel and Marx – were perhaps considered the more pressing enemies, but it is Plato, the root, who is more so now and in the longer term. Recently I read a book published in 2001 that discussed Popper as a thinker fading into history because of his success, who would only need to be re-discovered in the event of resurgence in communism, fascism, or religious fundamentalism. Safe to say we could use him now! Never trust the benigh dictator. Recommended by Mike King no reviews | add a review
References to this work on external resources.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Book description |
|
Popper was born in 1902 to a Viennese family of Jewish origin. He taught in Austria until 1937, when he emigrated to New Zealand in anticipation of the Nazi annexation of Austria the following year, and he settled in England in 1949. Before the annexation, Popper had written mainly about the philosophy of science, but from 1938 until the end of the Second World War he focused his energies on political philosophy, seeking to diagnose the intellectual origins of German and Soviet totalitarianism. The Open Society and Its Enemies was the result.
In the book, Popper condemned Plato, Marx, and Hegel as "holists" and "historicists"--a holist, according to Popper, believes that individuals are formed entirely by their social groups; historicists believe that social groups evolve according to internal principles that it is the intellectual's task to uncover. Popper, by contrast, held that social affairs are unpredictable, and argued vehemently against social engineering. He also sought to shift the focus of political philosophy away from questions about who ought to rule toward questions about how to minimize the damage done by the powerful. The book was an immediate sensation, and--though it has long been criticized for its portrayals of Plato, Marx, and Hegel--it has remained a landmark on the left and right alike for its defense of freedom and the spirit of critical inquiry.
(retrieved from Amazon Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:56:58 -0500)
The first test round has been closed. Visit the Open Shelves Classification group for details.
Quick Links |
| Ebooks | Audio | Swap |
| — | — | 0/20 |
I think that Popper's best intuition is the falsification principle (something is true until it's proven wrong): in some regards this concept may seem even obvious, but it is not.
On the contrary, it's the fundamental base of science and critical thought. (