A short of clip of Karl Popper discussing the Open Society from a 1974 interview. The translation is mine. For more Popper: • Karl Popper More Short Clips: • Shorter Clips & Videos... #Philosophy #Popper #OpenSociety
Пікірлер: 167
@frivolitymachine391411 ай бұрын
Every time.
@zapre228411 ай бұрын
Are you recognising patterns over there.
@JB-qt3wo3 ай бұрын
^^Shut it down!
@rodrigosilveira25252 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Hope you upload more videos of Popper!
@Philosophy_Overdose2 жыл бұрын
Yeah, definitely!
@dann60672 жыл бұрын
@@Philosophy_Overdose completely ignore my requests to upload Socrates to Sartre thanks dude. 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
@Philosophy_Overdose2 жыл бұрын
@@dann6067 I don't know if I can yet...I'm trying to be careful!
@dann60672 жыл бұрын
@@Philosophy_Overdose you replied 😅😅 sorry for being so adamant. Take your time.
@JB-qt3wo3 ай бұрын
Test
@Bharati_03 ай бұрын
Thankyou Dear for Uploading this....Greetings From India🥰❤
@stephenoverdorf491711 ай бұрын
Madness
@BinanceUSD Жыл бұрын
The video cuts out the bit before he states the easy changes to constitutions. At 2.44
@wavyent.musicvideos6 ай бұрын
What are the easy changes he says?
@praveenkumardhankar27167 ай бұрын
It's all an experiment to philosophers. But there's a distinction with scientific and social experiments. Plus they're much more costly and the results can rarely be reproduced over a small period of time.
@predragnikitz9106 Жыл бұрын
One of the founders of our modern world!
@digger684310 ай бұрын
Unfortunatly
@freudefreud6 ай бұрын
You have other alternatives - the nazi world, communist GULAG world, North Korea, China, Islamic extrimists world. Feel free to choose.
@prometheus54055 ай бұрын
Why is everyone whining about the modern world?
@predragnikitz91065 ай бұрын
@@prometheus5405 Who is whining? Modern world IS GREAT!
@tim900035 ай бұрын
@@predragnikitz9106outbound184 and digger6843 are whining quite publicly here
@chaselee86 Жыл бұрын
Does George Soro's "Open Society Foundation" has anything to do with open society?
@andres6868 Жыл бұрын
of course, Soros was a student and admirer of Popper, and named his foundations after Popper's book
@Lsr000 Жыл бұрын
This man is Soro's ideological influence, but I doubt that what Soro's is doing has the same meaning and intention with Popper's idea. I think it's kinda the same with Karl Marx and the communist system
@andres6868 Жыл бұрын
@@Lsr000 of course, Popper would be probably outraged at the sort of stuff Soros is funding though its Open Society Foundations (Popper was a political liberal, but not a cultural leftist)
@zapre228411 ай бұрын
Yes. He was Sorros mentor
@sbusc710 ай бұрын
@@Lsr000 Exactly. Soros got Popper's Open Society backwards
@heder69732 жыл бұрын
Karl popper on "Absolute Truth" Please reupload that video.
@Philosophy_Overdose2 жыл бұрын
Yes, I will very shortly!
@alexrichter13622 жыл бұрын
Freedom is the only absolute truth, because it denies absolute truth.
@PhilipBaker-sf4yv7 ай бұрын
@@alexrichter1362if it denies absolute truth then its adherents would have to rule it out as being absolutely true and that is the absolute truth
@daveconrad65622 күн бұрын
@@alexrichter1362preach
@manta56710 ай бұрын
This guy.
@newbbietrader99182 жыл бұрын
One of the founders of the 21century agenda
@tristanreynolds Жыл бұрын
"the 21st century agenda" you make it sound like a conspiracy theory 😂
@Revengetoa2 Жыл бұрын
I don’t know if that’s on the agenda or even something he came up with
@tristanreynolds Жыл бұрын
@@Sintinx2 I was naive. Obviously this comment is referencing George Soros and nwo adjacent theories. Do better people!
@Sintinx2 Жыл бұрын
@@tristanreynolds You said we name it like that because we are conspiracy theorists. But no, that’s what the United Nations named their plan, not us. Stop beating around the bush
@tristanreynolds Жыл бұрын
@@Sintinx2 The united Nations has "agendas" (they usually turn out poorly)...but no The 21st Century Agenda. It's a coincidence because both Popper and Hayek (they were good friends) address the mentality of the "conspiracy theory of society". Things are more complicated than just assigning blame to the intentions of evil people. I understand the impulse but yeah.
@Soulseeologia7 ай бұрын
He’s a sociologist people
@SurfbyShootin7 ай бұрын
As a fellow Ashkenazi jew, Open Society values are of existential importance!
@a541095 ай бұрын
I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm one too.
@Arjmm9 күн бұрын
@@a54109Ashkenazi jew or open society member?
@dgib16946 ай бұрын
His definition of democracy is very bourgeois
@Diamondragan6 ай бұрын
And conservative. Distributing power in democracy is a recipe for stasis, stagnation, or even regression. The conservatives fear the might of a radical majority that rises up and transforms everything at once. What do the progressives fear? The passage of time. The longer we are restrained, the longer injustice continues to reign.
@bodnariucdan7684 ай бұрын
This man is a genius but he creates rivers of blood with his ideas
@redtop528 ай бұрын
Philanthropist Soro's wow just wow. Eric Voegelin "Dilettantish crap"
@frigidtsunami10 ай бұрын
flaws of constitutions, but I didn't hear an option.
@neriodante38175 ай бұрын
The herald of the Habiru Anti-national League.
@nkenchington65756 ай бұрын
Man's achievement is to have created a world of rhyme, in the intimate imagination, which is as real in its way as any country on the map. Sir Karl Popper, in one of his most important papers, calls it "The Third World" or "World 3". The first world is the objective world of things. The second world is my inner subjective world; but, says Popper, there's a third world, the world of objective contents of thoughts. Teilhard de Chardin calls this third world the "Noosphere", that is, the world of the mind.
@pathofthegamer85906 ай бұрын
There isnt a modern government on earth smart enough, capable enough, and nimble enough to accomplish this hyper pragmatic approach to its politics. Nor is there a civilian base anywhere in the world willing enough to grant such free reign required of a government to socially engineer at the level he describes throughout his work. The paradox of Popperian politics is that it is inevitably closed. It looks to limit a government "just so" while allowing it the necessary power of coercion to socially engineer; but at whose behest and towards what ends? Once you answer those two questions, you have closed your doors. I've always felt that his ideology was best digested as a liberal fantasy, something you only use in a thought experiment that has left the world behind for the purely abstract. While his approach may be an extreme, it still might be a useful polemic, but it is not realistic. I'd also add that his pragmatic approach is in direct conflict with pragmatic theories of truth. We don't run experiments and find new data just to restructure our entire theory. We blend the two and conform them in ways that uphold what has been previously held as truth
@JB-qt3wo3 ай бұрын
Very good points. Reading Soros’s books is a very good insight into what the ideas of Popper look like when fleshed out into reality. It’s essentially left-hand path which is why Soros wrote a book called “The Alchemy of finance”. His whole idea is to weaponize degenerative forces to inject chaos into the market, and then following his principle of “reflexivity” he capitalizes on the seemingly irrational behavior of human beings when they begin acting on fear.
@sushantkumar9202Ай бұрын
It's very easy to misunderstood philosophy.
@James-ll3jbАй бұрын
But the idea something can't be true unless it is susceptible to the possibility of falsification is logically absurd.
@DiotimaMantinea-qm5ytАй бұрын
*can't be scientific
@James-ll3jbАй бұрын
@@DiotimaMantinea-qm5yt They say more: that if it isn't scientifically falsifiable it shant be believed true....
@BinanceUSD Жыл бұрын
Every political person wants power and more of it and some are prepared to do what it takes. Nice guy then into 😈
@locomotive900011 ай бұрын
"Democratically elected parliaments have too much power." - member of silver-tongued minority that definitely isn't trying to take control
@petersanmiguel1164 Жыл бұрын
Working for the devil is a losing proposition. It doesn't pay.
@mortiel84 Жыл бұрын
Devil doesnt exist 🤭
@petersanmiguel1164 Жыл бұрын
@@mortiel84 the Bible says he does. He was an angel, Lucifer, who rebelled against God, and became Satan. It seems that one third of the angels followed him in the rebellion and became demons.
@tristanreynolds Жыл бұрын
Are you saying popper worked for the devil? 😁
@petersanmiguel1164 Жыл бұрын
@@tristanreynolds I think Soros is.
@petersanmiguel1164 Жыл бұрын
@@tristanreynolds no, because I know nothing about him. I didn’t even watch the video. I think George Soros works for the devil.
@Revengetoa2 Жыл бұрын
I like Popper, but I think his obsession with the scientific method prevents him from answering the more relevant question of whether democracy is sustainable (or even possible) under capitalism.
@BinanceUSD Жыл бұрын
Capitalism has provided more freedom than any policy or political person. Iphone for example or convenience stores.
@madhupran4 Жыл бұрын
You have the reverse Q as well. Can capitalism withstand democracy.
@Revengetoa2 Жыл бұрын
@@madhupran4 What democracy would that be?
@Josh-fz9rh11 ай бұрын
well good thing in the US we are a republic
@Revengetoa211 ай бұрын
@@Josh-fz9rh You mean it’s a good thing that we have a plutocracy which props up figureheads under the guise of republic, under the additional rhetorical disguise of democracy? Amen. If people found out, they might get offended at the idea that they’re nothing but tools for someone else’s profits.
@LMvdB022 жыл бұрын
He should've stayed with philosophy of science
@tannerhagen774 Жыл бұрын
Why? Just read the book happy to defend his critique on fascism and historicism which is embedded in communist thought. I’d enjoy to be tested if you find that exchange worthwhile.
@tristanreynolds Жыл бұрын
So, you a communist or a right wing conspiracy theorist?
@jonathanthethird5211 ай бұрын
@@tannerhagen774 Popper takes all of this book to critique historically fatalist narratives and grand plans and somehow link them to genocidal, totalitarian regimes. But his thorough criticism that these are all somehow "not good" can only be backed up by a fatalist, grand narrative like those he is critiquing. Plus he poses that democracy is the system that minimizes death in regime change, which might be true in principle, but that is meaningless in a book critiquing the use of grand principles for political planning. In the end, this book is a stillborn attempt to link Popper's brilliant scientific principle to politics, which serves as a great deconstruction of past absolute narratives, but doesn't refute the need for such narratives at visions *at all*. He just gestures towards a somehow coherent "open, incremental process" that's somehow mostly free of these forces, but no such processes have ever actually existed.
@tannerhagen77411 ай бұрын
@@jonathanthethird52 Do you really think he is offering a grand narrative or just a roadmap to critically think about the issue at hand and what evidence prior we can utilize to assist in guiding towards solutions which doesn’t exclude some methods of experimentation as long as it is rational? It’s quite frankly banal observation, but the “science” charge is something I find him to be critiquing in politics as he admits there are unintended consequences to policy making and when there are those who religiously adhere to various propositions (historicism) that have no corollary to reality or at very least excludes any evidence to the contrary is bad policy especially when not going by “piecemeal” methods but the changing of the entire system (unintended consequences compounded further). I can pull some quotes from the book but the very essence of his critique of Marxism is that it claims to be a science applying it to politics which is messy. To help clarify what you are saying if we take Popper’s “science” application and reduce it to the meaning of “be rational when applying policy” would you find this a highly contentious and if so why? An analogy for clarification: my house has a leak and I go to someone who takes into consideration the causes and what remedies would be effective (I’m sure you can have some form of postmodern critique saying it’s a narrative, house still needs fixed by proven means). I have choices in how to go about it compared to a fanatic who says the whole house actually has to be torn down, I doesn’t care if 80% household rejects propositions as he knows what is best (perhaps doesn’t even know construction in the first place). Democracy allows for such discussion to take place where narrative can compete while a religion already claims to know what is best.
@PhilipBaker-sf4yv7 ай бұрын
@tristanreynolds A right wing truther. ( Only right wing due to the huge slump to the left)You are using loaded terms which has damaged your logical facilities. It is a common fault with libtards
@dann60672 жыл бұрын
Pimple popper
@igormendonca40267 ай бұрын
disagreeable ISFJ with developed Fe and Ti
@user-hb2ku5oq5r5 ай бұрын
He was an influencer in the way of thinking of Mr.George Soros¡¡
@raycarter4030 Жыл бұрын
my guess, is that he is j e wish?
@locomotive900011 ай бұрын
correct
@13thAssassin9 ай бұрын
Absolutely. The so called chosen ones. One Judgement Day, we'll see how they're really chosen. The self entitlement is on another level, for such folks like them. No wonder why they believe they are chosen!
@gavincampbell65956 ай бұрын
What difference could it possibly make if he is Jewish, unless you are anti-Semitic?
@gavincampbell65956 ай бұрын
And Popper was of Lutheran background.
@gavincampbell65956 ай бұрын
@@locomotive9000Wrong. Popper was a Lutheran.
@MS-rj5hg9 ай бұрын
An all-powerful parliament is the problem… all-powerful is an attribute only for Allah and his system is the one