Popper describes himself as a rationalist and a fallibilist, as opposed to a historicist, a relativist, or authoritarian. Hegel is the main target of Popper's intellectual vitriol - at one point he calls him a clown, and the entire section on Hegel is amusing as an example of rhetorical assault on not just Hegel's ideas, but also his pretentious and obtuse mode of communication. Heidegger also falls under this category of the intentionally impenetrable writers; it seems he is trying to bury his weak and dangerous arguments under a mountain of difficult prose, so as to deflect any pointed criticism.

Popper's critique of Marx is more nuanced. Popper takes Marx seriously as an analyst of 19th century capitalism, not as a prophet or historicist. These latter tendencies of Marx is what arguably created the brutal authoritarianism of Lenin and Stalin.

Although I haven't read Popper before, he is the defender of Enlightenment that we need in 2023. His argument that democratic institutions are the pillars of any free society are so relevant to the anti-rationalist thinking that is so pervasive in the present rise of right-wing totalitarianism.

Indispensable

Personally I found it fascinating. Much resonates with today.

Modern totalitarianism is only an episode within the perennial revolt against freedom and reason. From older episodes it is distinguished not so much by its ideology, as by the fact that its leaders succeeded in realizing one of the boldest dreams of their predecessors; they made the revolt against freedom a popular movement.

Dismantling of the Marxist doctrine.

And more importantly a warning of suppressive doctrines like it.

This book helped me understand the profoundly authoritarian nature of the philosophies of Plato and his political heirs, Hegel and Marx. I did not realize the risk embedded in the totalitarian understanding of Hegelian State, which had so much influence in the various versions Marxists. But contrary to what the author intended, it did not take me to the arms of liberalism. But, to be on guard against the State.

Interesting but uneven. I'm not overly familiar with the material than Popper is critiquing but as ever a lot of it may be an idiosyncratic interpretation or very focused take on certain aspects. Popper feels on safer territory when he turn to a more general discussion of historicism towards the end of the book.

Brilliant, overall. A great exegesis on both Marx and historicist philosophy. A bit uncharitable to Hegel (though not without reason) and somewhat off-base in the criticism of the sociology of knowledge (philosophers and sociologists of knowledge continue in many ways to talk past each other regarding whether epistemology is a somewhat a priori, criterion-oriented discipline or a socially constructed phenomenon. Having a background in both views, I would suggest that both have merit in their own respective domains. But I digress). I take away from this and volume a renewed vigor with which to pursue sociological questions as well as a clearer understanding as to what is at stake in the role of history and how one chooses to answer social theory questions.

j

actually read Logic Scientific Discovery. Referred by Soros. Historic theory.

The most good-faith and productive engagement with Marx I've seen from a critic. Unfortunately, we've been brought down to the level of Jordan Peterson. A reflection of the pathetically weak state of our present (nominally) democratic institutions, which Popper so powerfully advocates for strengthening here.

The Open Society and its Enemies, divided into two parts, presents a critical view. The second part, The High Tide of Prophecy, addresses Marx and Hegel. Popper advocates for the open society, freeing critical thinking and personal decisions. He warns against the threat of totalitarianism. Popper opposes historicism, which claims to predict the future like scientific laws, leading societies astray. Believing in such fixed futures causes misery, he argues, and Marx and Hegel's failure to predict progress exemplify this flaw. Popper emphasizes individual importance, supporting democracy as the only system capable of self-correction. He criticizes Hegel's influence on contemporary historicism but finds Marx's protest for the working class commendable. Popper advocates controlling economic power to prevent it from dominating political power, cautioning against the dangers of historicism and prioritizing the state over individual interests.