Popper: Open Society and its Enemies

Karl Popper is famous for favoring an open society, one in which the individual is treated as an end in himself and social arrangements are subjected to critical evaluation, which he defends largely by appeal to a Kantian ethic of respecting the dignity of rational beings. In this essay, I consider for the first time what the implications of a characteristically African ethic, instead prescribing respect for our capacity to relate communally, are for how the state should operate in an (...) open society. I argue that, while an Afro-communal moral foundation does not prescribe a closed society, it supports an open society politics of a sort different from the one that Popper specifies. For Popper, the state in an open society should improve social arrangements albeit without seeking to promote objective goods, should protect rights that merely serve the function of facilitating individual choice, and should employ majoritarian democracy to be able to avoid unwelcome rulers and policies. On all three counts, I show that a relational ethic typical of the African philosophical tradition entails different, intuitively attractive approaches to politics. This chapter is reprinted from an article that initially appeared in Jus Cogens (2020). (shrink)

Assessing the implementation of various instruments and solutions in a healthcare system, we cannot limit ourselves to examining their impact on the fulfillment of the criteria of justice and equity alone. Another important social objective is to maximize social welfare under the conditions of the scarcity of resources. The aim of the article is to analyze the impact on social welfare of the implementation of private insurance into the existing system of public security, with a view to the following factors: (...) the reasons for restrictions in the public system, the assumed forms of the aggregation of individual utilities into the social welfare function, and the assumed image of society. (shrink)

Western man has long lost his way in his quest for constructivist models, largely because of his infatuation with utopian ideals. These models have represented a complete negation of the Open Society. In the latter part of the twentieth century there has been a dramatic reawakening from these dreams. The time has now come to reappraise the thinking of the past, which simply described possible systems for social organization on behalf of the common good and not models for perfect societies. (...) Rocco Pezzimenti retraces and analyses paths towards a true balance between "laws" and "rights" in society, something often neglected in recent western thought. First formulated in ancient Rome, the concept of rights is to be found - not by chance - at the heart of the speculations of thinkers such as Montesquieu, Vico, Hume, and others who set forth the premises for the liberal systems in which, despite many problems, we have the fortune to live. Essential to this analysis is a division of the Greco-Latin binomial, considered indivisible for far too long. These two cultures of the ancient world remain relevant and very close to us as the roots and bases of our contemporary western civilization. However, the author shows that it is a reclaiming of the Latin culture that can pave the way to the Open Society in which, even today, few people can claim to live. He looks at western political thought from Cicero to William of Ockham, re-examining as well much of the best thought of the intervening centuries. He traces progress towards a liberal and truly federated society - the Open Society, which we may regard not as an imposed Utopia but the fruit of history. (shrink)

This book is largely unpublished material from Popper’s literary remains regarding his The Open Society and Its Enemies that conveys some interesting stories about its publication and initial reception, throws light on its message, and complements it somewhat. It also contains much that Popper hardly discussed elsewhere.

logical failure or contradiction by a fact. Intuition alone can decide between two competing theories agreeing with the facts. (ibid. ...

In this long-awaited volume, Jeremy Shearmur and Piers Norris Turner bring to light Popper's most important unpublished and uncollected writings from the time of The Open Society until his death in 1994. After The Open Society: Selected Social and Political Writings reveals the development of Popper's political and philosophical thought during and after the Second World War, from his early socialism through to the radical humanitarianism of The Open Society. The papers in this collection, many of which are available here (...) for the first time, demonstrate the clarity and pertinence of Popper's thinking on such topics as religion, history, Plato and Aristotle, while revealing a lifetime of unwavering political commitment. After The Open Society illuminates the thought of one of the twentieth century's greatest philosophers and is essential reading for anyone interested in the recent course of philosophy, politics, history and society. (shrink)

Introduction: optimist, pessimist, and pragmatist views of scientific knowledge (1963) -- Memories of Austria -- Lectures from New Zealand -- On The open society -- The Cold War and after.

Nationalism has had a complex relation with the discipline of political theory during the 20th century. Political theory has often been deeply uneasy with nationalism in relation to its role in the events leading up to and during the Second World War. Many theorists saw nationalism as an overly narrow and potentially irrationalist doctrine. In essence it embodied a closed vision of the world. This article focuses on one key contributor to the immediate post-war debate—Karl Popper—who retained deep misgivings about (...) nationalism until the end of his life, and indeed saw the events of the early 1990s (shortly before his death) as a confirmation of this distrust. Popper was one of a number of immediate post war writers, such as Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, who shared this unease with nationalism. They all had a powerful effect on social and political thought in the English-speaking world. Popper particularly articulated a deeply influential perspective that fortuitously encapsulated a cold war mentality in the 1950s. In 2005 Popper's critical views are doubly interesting, since the last decade has seen a renaissance of nationalist interests. The collapse of the Berlin wall in 1989, and the changing political landscape of international and domestic politics, has seen once again a massive growth of interest in nationalism, particularly from liberal political theorists and a growing, and, at times, immensely enthusiastic academic literature, trying to provide a distinctively benign benediction to nationalism. (shrink)

‘If in this book harsh words are spoken about some of the greatest among the intellectual leaders of mankind, my motive is not, I hope, to belittle them. It springs rather from my conviction that, if our civilization is to survive, we must break with the habit of deference to great men.’ - Karl Popper, from the Preface Written in political exile during the Second World War and first published in two volumes in 1945, Karl Popper’s The Open Society and (...) Its Enemies is one of the most influential books of all time. Hailed by Bertrand Russell as a ‘vigorous and profound defence of democracy’, its now legendary attack on the philosophies of Plato, Hegel and Marx exposed the dangers inherent in centrally planned political systems and through underground editions become an inspiration to lovers of freedom living under communism in Eastern Europe. Popper’s highly accessible style, his erudite and lucid explanations of the thoughts of great philosophers and the recent resurgence of totalitarian regimes around the world are just three of the reasons for the enduring popularity of The Open Society and Its Enemies and why it demands to be read today and in years to come. (shrink)

Written in political exile during the Second World War and first published in 1945, Karl Popper's The Open Society and Its Enemies is one of the most influential books of the twentieth century. Hailed by Bertrand Russell as a 'vigorous and profound defence of democracy', its now legendary attack on the philosophies of Plato, Hegel and Marx exposed the dangers inherent in centrally planned political systems. Popper's highly accessible style, his erudite and lucid explanations of the thought of great philosophers (...) and the recent resurgence of totalitarian regimes around the world are just three of the reasons for the enduring popularity of The Open Society and Its Enemies , and for why it demands to be read both today and in years to come. This is the first of two volumes of The Open Society and Its Enemies. (shrink)

Written in political exile during the Second World War and first published in 1945, Karl Popper's The Open Society and Its Enemies is one of the most influential books of the twentieth century. Hailed by Bertrand Russell as a 'vigorous and profound defence of democracy', its now legendary attack on the philosophies of Plato, Hegel and Marx exposed the dangers inherent in centrally planned political systems. Popper's highly accessible style, his erudite and lucid explanations of the thought of great philosophers (...) and the recent resurgence of totalitarian regimes around the world are just three of the reasons for the enduring popularity of The Open Society and Its Enemies , and for why it demands to be read both today and in years to come. This is the second of two volumes of The Open Society and Its Enemies. (shrink)

This paper, relying in particular upon the correspondence from Popper to Gombrich, deals with the history of the publication of The Open Society and its Enemies in Routledge. Special attention is paid to the history of the tittle.

A Clearly argued and easy to read defense of Karl Popper's philosophy.

Popper's Open Society After Fifty Years presents a coherent survey of the reception and influence of Karl Popper's masterpiece The Open Society and its Enemies over the fifty years since its publication in 1945, as well as applying some of its principles to the context of modern Eastern Europe. This unique volume contains papers by many of Popper's contemporaries and friends, including such luminaries as Ernst Gombrich, in his paper 'The Open Society and its Enemies: Remembering its Publication Fifty Years (...) Ago'. (shrink)

Popper's Open Society After Fifty Years presents a coherent survey of the reception and influence of Karl Popper's masterpiece The Open Society and its Enemies over the fifty years since its publication in 1945, as well as applying some of its principles to the context of modern Eastern Europe. This unique volume contains papers by many of Popper's contemporaries and friends, including such luminaries as Ernst Gombrich, in his paper "The Open Society and its Enemies: Remembering its Publication Fifty Years (...) Ago.". (shrink)

Karl Popper is widely regarded as the twentieth century’s greatest critic of Marxism. This article, based upon his 1942-47 correspondence with Rudolf Carnap, shows that Popper’s critique of scientific socialism had less to do with Marx’s social goals than with the attitudes that Marxists adopted toward their means of achieving them. It also reveals how Carnap, who tried to keep his politics separate from his epistemology, managed to mix the two when refusing to give Popper his wholehearted support in finding (...) both a publisher for The Open Society and Its Enemies and a position that would give him greater opportunities for research. (shrink)

Popper's view of the enemies of the open society is held to rest upon psycholo gism, a view of the very great dangers of misguided intellectuals, and a cyclical view of historical process. While there is something to these claims, they are treated here skeptically. But the purpose of the article is less to attack than to reconstruct. To that end, key elements of a sociology appropriate to an open society are offered.

While the ethics and the sociology of The Open Society can stand up to criticism after 50 years, it is argued that Popper's thesis that closed societies are prompted and promoted by "historicism" cannot. Moreover, Popper's conceptions of "historicism" and of "developmental law" are based on a misunderstanding of our knowledge of history, the practice of historical writing, and the discipline of sociology. In conclusion there is an attempt to explain why, of all people Popper ever criticized for their historicism, (...) Darwin alone was singled out by him for exoneration. (shrink)

This study is an intellectual biography of Karl Popper, placing his work in the Viennese context, and examining the relationship between his Autobiography and his philosophical and political works. It recovers the cultural, social and political life of interwar Vienna, and traces the intellectual and political formation of Karl Popper. It argues that Popper's works and views have been badly misinterpreted and misunderstood because of the cultural disjunction between the German-Austrian milieu in which they were formed and the Anglo-Saxon world (...) where they became popular after the Second World War. By placing Popper's works in interwar Viennese discourses on the methodology of the sciences, politics, economics and psychology, the study offers a different reading of the works and draws a new portrait of one of the century's foremost philosophers. ;The study is divided into three parts. Part I recovers the fin-de-siecle background to Popper's work, including Jewish life in Vienna, progressive politics, Austrian philosophy and the crisis of modernism. Part II, "From Politics to Science," analyses the formation of Popper's philosophy of science during the interwar years. It traces Popper's intellectual development from his political involvement with Communism and the school-reform movement to his studies in psychology. It explains his major philosophical breakthrough in 1929, which culminated in The Logic of Scientific Discovery . Part III, "From Science to Politics," analyzes the formation of Popper's political philosophy. It argues that the failure of Austrian Socialism, and not the confrontation with Soviet Communism, was the central experience behind Popper's critique of Marxism, and that the Cold War is an inappropriate context for the reading of his political works. By focusing on German and Austrian Methodenstreiten in the social sciences and on debates on socialization and planning in interwar Vienna, Part III creates a new framework for the understanding of The Poverty of Historicism. It then proceeds to discuss The Open Society and Its Enemies in the context of contemporary analyses of Fascism and totalitarianism, and investigates the manner in which Popper's self-understanding and Autobiography illuminate his controversial interpretation of Plato, Socrates and Classical Athens. The study concludes with an evaluation of Popper's contribution to contemporary liberalism. (shrink)

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. (shrink)