cdc-coteauxdegaronne
» » The Open Society and Its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath v. 2
eBook The Open Society and Its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath v. 2 ePub

eBook The Open Society and Its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath v. 2 ePub

by Karl R. Popper

  • ISBN: 071004626X
  • Category: Philosophy
  • Subcategory: Politics
  • Author: Karl R. Popper
  • Language: English
  • Publisher: ROUTLEDGE; 4th edition (March 1, 1968)
  • ePub book: 1836 kb
  • Fb2 book: 1109 kb
  • Other: txt lrf azw lrf
  • Rating: 4.4
  • Votes: 407

Description

Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Details (if other): Cancel. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Not the book you’re looking for?

Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Start by marking Open Society and Its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath v. 2 as Want to Read: Want to Read savin. ant to Read. Open Society and Its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath v. 2. by. Karl R Popper.

Popper was born in 1902 to a Viennese family of Jewish origin

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.

Popper is probably the last century's most eminent philosopher, but this is really a book about politics and history

See photo of book covers included with this listing. Corners are moderately bumped. Shelf wear & chipping are evident. Popper is probably the last century's most eminent philosopher, but this is really a book about politics and history. He talks about how governments change and evolve, how you balance human and economic freedom, and freedom vs. social responsibility, and other very practical topics. Best of all, it's not a preachy book that has an axe to grind. It's not trying to suck you into the author's viewpoint with bad logic and emotional arguments.

The Open Society and its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath (Vol. 2). Karl Popper.

Cover 2: Hegel and Marx. The Open Society And Its Enemies. Complete: Volumes I and II Karl R. Popper 1962. Although the book presupposes nothing but open-mindedness in the reader, its object is not so much to popularize the questions treated as to solve them. Volume I: The Spell Of Plato. Volume II: The High Tide of Prophecy. Note To The Introduction.

Hegel, Marx, Engels, Lenin etc. are the ENEMIES of the Open Society. But, reading Popper's take down of Hegel and Marx in vol. 2 is like watching J. J. Watt take down a quarterback

Hegel, Marx, Engels, Lenin etc. He says straight out that Christian Societies are inherently "Open", because you can join or not join them as you decide for yourself. You don't have to be born a Christian. You can become a Christian is you want. Watt take down a quarterback. It is one of the most important philosophical books of the 20th century, far exceeding many far more famous ones.

Show full item record.

On July 20, we had the largest server crash in the last 2 years. Full recovery of all data can take up to 2 weeks! So we came to the decision at this time to double the download limits for all users until the problem is completely resolved. Thanks for your understanding! Progress: 8. 2% restored. Главная The Open Society and its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath (Vol.

The Open Society and Its Enemies is a work on political philosophy by the philosopher Karl Popper, in which the author presents a "defence of the open society against its enemies".

The Open Society and Its Enemies is a work on political philosophy by the philosopher Karl Popper, in which the author presents a "defence of the open society against its enemies", and offers a critique of theories of teleological historicism, according to which history unfolds inexorably according to universal laws

By (author) Sir Karl Popper.

By (author) Sir Karl Popper. AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window). Close X. Learn about new offers and get more deals by joining our newsletter.

Volume 2. firm spine and unmarked pages

Comments

Fato Fato
Popper's rich and convincing indictment against state religion and limitless power caught in the vacuum of historicist prophecy is unsparing, lucid and enlightening. Plato, Hegel and Marx represent the historicist tradition of social engineering, and their philosophical contributions, though of great importance, have collectively served to undermine the transparency of the open society; that is, real democracy. Of the three, Popper strikes an intriguing affection and pity for Marx, whom he distinguishes from Plato and Hegel as utterly sincere and well intentioned, but a failed prophet nonetheless. Of Plato's logical aptitude and sociological ingenuity, Popper pays due credit. Hegel, however, is a different story altogether. To Popper, Hegel was an arcane and mendacious state philosopher, one who cloaked his philosophy in impenetrable mysticism and specious reasoning. He is given the briefest analysis out of the three, but his worst tendencies echo in the impoverished corners of Marx's epistemology.

Plato's legacy and intellectual foundations are not assessed on their terms, but are reviewed in context of preceding historical ideas and institutions. This is fitting for the historical and philosophical conceit of the book, for Plato, like Hegel and Marx, would stake the condition of the present moment as the natural heir to the past. At first sight this claim is perfectly reasonable; however, Plato did not conceive progression as a mere product of linear continuity, but as a thing in itself; history is a kind of living entity implicit in its tradition of chaos. In light of the travesty of Athenian democracy, of Socrates’ fate, and the Tyranny of Thirty, Plato resigns himself to the role of reformer. He achieves this by continuing the Socratic tradition of the dialectic and by mounting a damning charge against and lucid alternative to democracy. Surveying the classes, Plato ascribes qualities to each as the motivation for their existence. His understanding of class and politics suffices for the development of his Republic. Plato’s Republic is a utopian state, but it is by no means, as many have been mistaken in their estimation of it, a unique concept. Plato’s universalism and definition of flux owe themselves to the thought of Heraclitus, and his admiration of asceticism and defence are, by his own admission, qualities unique to Spartan culture. The theoretical aspect of this formula is embedded in Euclidean geometry, with a particular emphasis given to symmetry; hence Plato’s ability to resist change. The Republic is already perfect; any further change is a negative. It is unquestionable and unalterable in its finality. This is Popper’s bone of contention: piecemeal social engineering is natural, utopian engineering is not. Plato has no illusions about the imperfection of human culture, but the Republic on its own terms is a flawless construct; it therefore supersedes and tames the baser attitudes of the undesirable enclaves that live in it. The classes are categorically distributed according to their virtues and desires. By stratifying society in such a way, Plato hoped to remove the corruptive elements of self-interest and political upheaval. To Popper, this brand of social engineering is as absurd as it is dangerous. Popper’s interpretation of Plato’s closed society is the essence of his critique against historicism and a so-called perfect society.

Given that Plato and Hegel are distanced by 2000 years of history, it may well appear that Popper’s undertaking of establishing intellectual continuity between the two is as ambitious as it is unlikely, but the enduring qualities of Plato’s epistemology lie in the roots of Aristotelian philosophy. Platonism was briefly rehabilitated in the neo-Platonist movement in Ancient Rome, but his body of work did not have the same effect upon Christians and the Middle Ages the way Aristotle did. Of course, Aristotle was a student of Plato in Ancient Greece, and he impressed his master’s more admirable traits; that is, his treatment of aesthetics, logic and reason, if not his political and moral philosophy. Aristotle, too, synthesized his formula for a stable polity, which manifested in his sexpartite model. Continuing that great Grecian tradition of the dialectic, Aristotle juxtaposed the valuable systems of governance against their natural evils, for example: Kingship is virtuous, a dictatorship is not; Politeia is admirable, democracy is corrupt. Once the optimal system of rulership has been established, it is an ultimate good. Proceeding from this theme, Hegel wrests Platonism from ancient history and distils it through the filter of 19th century governance. How do we qualify the best system, Hegel asks? What it is it shall be. The validity of ruling lies in its actual sources and operations, not in its normative aims. This forms of the basis of what’s known as moral positivism. This is deeply troubling, as this brand of moral positivism is an exercise in power enjoyed by the few, the privileged, and the ruling. This state of mind allows for a preponderance of the worst elements of state abuse, particularly the emphasis on war among as nations, which Hegel warmly endorses as an endearing trait of a nation’s character. Hegel’s historicist outputs assume a similar form to that of Marx, namely the dialectical triad – a crude plagiarism of Kant’s brilliant work on reason. With the totalitarian logic laid down by Plato and refined by the state philosopher Hegel, Popper brings us to the final prophet of historicism: Marx.

Marx, Popper claims, is unusual in the annals of the historicist school of thinking. It is undoubtedly true that Marx was a classical adherent of its core tendencies, and he, like Plato and Hegel, prophesied that the essence and meaning of human existence could be traced back to a single concept, but he was, unlike his predecessors, his own man. While Plato and Hegel were unequivocally servants to and expositors of formal power, Marx was quite the opposite. For Marx the terminus of capitalism was nearing its end; it had governed in human affairs since time immemorial and was the driving force behind the impression of power and oppression of the masses. Despite his persona sharing the same lofty historical quarters as Smith, Ricardo and Keynes, Marx’s economism was thin gruel. This was particularly self-evident to Lenin, who declared that proceeding from a Marxian framework would be a road to nowhere. Marx’s system of economics was polemical and reactionary, but despite his epistemological contributions to the social sciences, Marx had not developed a logically consistent manifesto of economics. His theory on market value, which included production and consumption, was terribly inconsistent, as was his critique of labour and consumption. It is true, Popper notes, that Marx’s critique of industry and capitalism more broadly had substance, but his alternatives were wrought with errors of empiricism and historicism. The factory line was microcosmic in its composition of all that was wrong in civilization, and Marx propped up the perils of the downtrodden working class as victims, but, eventually, beneficiaries. Far from being the scourge of mankind and freedom, as conservative populists contend, he was an intelligent and intuitive man, but a terribly misguided one. Unlike his forefathers, Marx believed in the common will of the people; a quality Popper obviously admired in him.

The Open Society and its Enemies is, in short, an absolute masterwork written by an eminently moral thinker. Please buy this book.
Lamranilv Lamranilv
I am no expert of philosophy or economics and so I am unsure of my right to label anything a classic. That said, I found this work really fascinating because it cogently brought together views about ethics, individualism, science and politics in a way that was novel and relevant to me.

How do Plato's views of collectivism and a political "Republic" contrast with the method of questioning and individual responsibility espoused by Socrates?

How does Kant's system of duty contrast with Hugel's dialectics?

Why is Marx simultaneously relevant and yet utterly wrong judged on bases he could hardly object to as a truly innovative social scientist?

How do these philosophies relate to each other and social and human progress through time?

If these questions and a really heartfelt defense of western liberalism plus a logical argument against relativistic philosophical thinking are questions and themes of interest then I would recommend the book. Warning: the initial chapters are fundamental but I found them to be a bit dense.
Washington Washington
I read this book at age 27 and understood little of it. I read it again at 35 and began to understand it. I read it again at 41 and breathed it in like fresh air. I have just read it again at 48 and find so much more in it than I found even at the last reading. This is a book to be read and re-read, deeply understood, and mined for it's multitude of ideas and arguments. 5 stars indeed - I love this book.
Pedar Pedar
I found this book difficult to read and it took me a long time to finish. The book is a masterpiece and i have learned a lot through reading it. I would recommend it only to those with strong motivation to read complicated books.
Geny Geny
I am not going to try to critique one of the seminal books of the 20th century but will limit this review to the format. The book - it was originally published in 2 volumes and probably should still be - is very large and quite heavy. The print is rather small but readable, the many footnotes even smaller but in darker print and so also readable. I don't think I would recommend this edition to anyone with limited eyesight.
Seevinev Seevinev
Though I prefer his first volume, that may be a matter of taste. I have loved the ancient Greeks since childhood and had believed since college that the celebration of Plato as a political philosopher was an error. But, reading Popper's take down of Hegel and Marx in vol. 2 is like watching J. J. Watt take down a quarterback. It is one of the most important philosophical books of the 20th century, far exceeding many far more famous ones.
Mikale Mikale
This deep read and analysis of the roots of totalitarianism, historicism and government begins be delving deeply into Plato's Laws and The Republic. Your perspective on the meaning of these works and the origins of the Nazi Germany, the distinction between Big Government and Communism will likely never be the same. A man who claims he learns nothing from this book is either in deep denial or a complete fool.
I'm still reading, it is quite long. It is an interesting description how we love our liberty but not the liberty of others. I would recommend it for those interested in the current evolution of political systems and societies worldwide.