Voegelin on Karl Popper's Open Society and Its Enemies

[dirmilj]

The published correspondence of Voegelin contains several other gems that deserve dwelling upon. Hope to see more of his thought on your channel in the future.

[snippletrap]

A work doesn't have to be philosophically insightful or rigorous to be useful to power. The Open Society and Its Enemies, like The Authoritarian Personality after it, was picked up and amplified because it reflected the prejudices and commitments of an influential segment of the ruling class.

[henridarocha]

Olavo de Carvalho hated Popper as well, mocked him constantly in delicious Portuguese 😁

[czgiomn]

Have you thought about doing more in depth videos on Voegelin? I keep hearing from people in my circle that they prefer Voegelin to Strauss, but I haven't got around to reading him much.

[mazyar_]

Wow that was vicious! big props to based Voegelin for shredding that little punk Popper to bits.

[intolerandus]

Thanks for enlightening the unqualified!

[jeffsmith]

This video is really helpful. I had to laugh at Voegelin’s letter. I read the open society and its enemies (both volumes). Had exactly the same impression. Popper’s abuse thru his use of -isms (Platonism, Aristoteleanism, Hegelianism, etc) felt like looking at a painting by Van Gough where he could only use a house painting brush.

[b.alexanderjohnstone]

'Rascally' is such an underused word (although was the letter a translation into English?)

[RenelioM]

I've been trying to figure out the philosophical thinking of Popper's Open Society to figure out what lies behind Soros' political philosophical ideas. This resumes all.

[maxheadrom]

I'll follow Popper's advice and take this criticism seriously and try to learn more about it.

[charlrichardengelbrecht]

After reading some of the comments by people without real names, I am more motivated to read Karl Popper's books than ever. Voegelin? Never heard of him.

[jren]

Great Video - have you read Walter Kaufman’s critique of Popper? I made a short video on in it, specifically in relation to a Hegel. Popper’s interpretation of Hegel is maybe the most egregious example of lazy philosophy in a book that is characterised by its laziness!

[borisshmagin]

V. V. Vapnik "the father of Machine Learning" shows mistakes in Popper's logic in his presentation 2007

[matthewgaulke]

I have observed this issue when dealing with things like Diversity Equity and Inclusion and even Mormonism that they will take words that are easy to get along with and support but then you find out later they have a different meaning to these words and how they want them to play out. It's dishonest and manipulative.

I'm often asking myself when I look at these movements is would I rather have my religion be cool or for it to work? The Open Society? That just sounds manipulative because we've been trained in The West as Liberals and in a Free Mason culture to value certian things and being open minded is hip but usually means swallowing whatever they feed you even if it's poison.

[bygabop]

What is an example of a rubbish sentence from The Open Society? How can a philosopher proposing a philosopher king not be problematic? How difficult can it be to criticise Plato when he appeals to the supernatural as a fundamental explanation of reality? I bet the person that wrote the letter only read a critical review. And why doesn’t he explain Popper’s misconceptions.

[RedactedBrainwaves]

Is this letter from Voegelin available in "The Collected Works of Eric Voegelin"? If yes, than in which volume?

[ypyp]

As someone whom is interested in philosophical and political works and of all points of view, but is a scientist and not a philosopher. It is clear to me that it feels like there is some form of major ideological split in the world today that appears to stray beyond general economic competition into 2 or more ideologies. But I’m having real difficulty understanding exactly what it is I’m seeing happen, as it appears there is a dynamic both within and between states.
Can anyone be kind enough to point me towards material that will help me get an objective understanding of what conflict of power is really happening at the moment please, as it is opaque to me?
My starting assumption is that it is conflicting metaphysical ideologies between a platonic basis of society and a deterministic/enlightenment basis of society, together with the minor permutations within each. Is this wrong?

[jortmaas]

Surprisingly, or maybe not, more ad hominem than actual argument against Poppers position/interpretation. We shouldn’t take ideas seriously because of who held them. Popper understood this like no other. He himself shouldn’t be exempt from this, but the contents of this letter are derogatory in a way it’s almost a waste of time to listen to it. Agree with Popper or not, the ‘protection’ granted to ‘authorities’ in the scientific/philosophical community is a perversion. Plato said some crazy shit (not even starting on Hegel), and we should not respect them for that. The converse is true as well.

[christopherhamilton]

Oooooh! Reporting what someone said about someone else in order to what? This is the epitome of dilettante…😂

[GilesMcRiker]

Wow the commenst section here is a real dumpster fire. Do people come here to discuss philosophy or to trash talk like a bunch of Red Sox fans?