27 Following


Currently reading

The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion
Melvin Lerner

Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (Routledge Classics)

Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (Routledge Classics) - Karl Popper The biggest problem with Popper is that he is far from the greatest writer ever. I find I am in general agreement with many of his ideas, but he does not make it easy. He repeats himself. He is overly vague. When he restates himself, he can be ever more vague sometimes. There is little flow to his writing. The major exception to this is “Self-Reference and Meaning in Ordinary Language,” an imitation Socratic dialogue disputing Wittgenstein at all. It is far and away the best written thing in the volume and funny, which is a real surprise. He should have done things like that more often. But I agree with him more often that I don't. Even though I may argue with his slags on existentialism. I think we have two very different ideas of the subject: he seems to focus exclusively on Jaspers, Sartre, Heidegger and Nietzsche (though he only mentions Jaspers), whereas I prefer the more pragmatic and practical and realistic folks, Camus, Arrendt, Ortega y Gasset. I think Popper wouldn't have so many issues with them, had he read them. But I can't help being impressed by the breadth of his knowledge. He was certainly a renaissance man and I am tempted to believe he was some kind of polymath: logician, philosopher of science, translator...I know at one time people had to learn a whole whack of different things, but I'm still impressed. The only thing keeping this from being a classic is his style, as I already mentioned. But then he was writing in his second (or third?) language...