The first and last time Wittgenstein and Popper discussed about philosophy, it ended with Ludwig menacing Popper with a poker.
Philosophers are a bit insane. ( )

In 1946 Karl Popper presented a brief paper on the problems of philosophy to a seminar of the Moral Science Club at Cambridge, a direct challenge to Ludwig Wittgenstein, who held there are no problems, but only interesting puzzles about confusing language. Wittgenstein apparently gestured about with a poker from the fireplace, and may have threatened Popper. Popper, it is contended, may have later lied about the events of the meeting. The authors describe the meeting and the development of the two philosophers from their roots in Vienna at the turn of the century. Wittgenstein was born an aristocrat, but fought in the war, gave up philosophy for a long time after his "Tractatus LogicoPhilosophus" to be a country school teacher, and turned to an ascetic life at Cambridge, often disappearing into the woods. Popper was born respectable but not rich and the inflation after WWI wiped out his family financially, and he was desparate for a post and recognition. The authors deftly describe the background and truth of the argument, and the book was very entertaining, a sort of middle of the road intellectual history. ( )

Edmonds and Eidinow provide a fascinating window into a very brief, yet meaningful exchange between several of the greatest philosophers of the twentieth century- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Karl Popper, and Bertrand Russell.

Wittgenstein and many of the philosophy faculty, graduate students and other scholars would gather weekly in a classroom on the campus of King's College in England for great philosophical discussions and stimulating debates.

On this particular occasion, at one of their meetings on a day in late October of 1946, Karl Popper was in the area giving a lecture and was invited to attend the meeting of the moral philosophy club. Wittgenstein's brief argument with Popper, which took place at that small classroom at King's College in the presence of Bertrand Russell and a handful of graduate philosophy students has become the stuff of legend.

Wittgenstein and Popper reportedly debated back and forth about their differing perspectives on the deep philosophical and linguistic argument at hand- including by some accounts Wittgenstein accentuating his point with a poker from the fireplace. Following this brief exchange, Wittgenstein reportedly made his point, threw down the poker and left the room. Reports differ as to who won the argument, but it has become part of both of their enduring philosophical legacies.

This thoughtful book sets the scene for this interesting exchange. The authors also provide a fascinating background into the early life and upbringing of both Wittgenstein and Popper- Wittgenstein as the son of a wealthy European oil tycoon who endured much tragedy in his younger life and eschewed wealth and privilege in his adult life; Popper coming from a more austere working class background.

A concise window into Wittgenstein's (and to some degree Popper and Russell's) works is also provided. Wittgenstein had published his brilliant yet somewhat obtuse "Tractatus Logico Philosophicus" some years earlier. Popper had written "The Open Society and Its Enemies," which was a scathing critique of authoritarianism and further developed the "open society" concept put forth by Bergson.

This book is a fascinating read, and provides enough concise background that one does not have to be a philosophy scholar to enjoy and benefit greatly from reading it. I highly recommend it! ( )

An enjoyable read, but a tad repetitive. I was hoping for more about the work of the two philosophers. The authors summarize some of their important disagreements, but overall, this is more a biographical sketch of two men from different neighborhoods of Vienna than about two influential philosophers of the 20th century. ( )

I enjoyed Wittgenstein’s Poker very much. I prefer the history of philosophy far more than actual philosophical problems/puzzles. This was a great book to introduce me to the persons of Ludwig Wittgenstein and Karl Popper.

My largest criticism is the bias toward Wittgenstein over Popper. I do understand the fascination by the more eccentric and quite possibly more brilliant Wittgenstein, but the authors do very little to shade their favor with ambiguity.

If people do not know who Popper or Wittgenstein are, they should pick up this book. I found the reading enjoyable and it perked my interest in Tractatus logico-philosophicus. We'll see if I actually read it. ( )