Suchergebnisse

Es steht außer Frage, daß Karl Popper ein leidenschaftlicher Verfechter der Demokratie ist, und zwar nicht nur aus ethischen Gründen, sondern auch aus Gründen der Effizienz einer Staats- und Herrschaftsform. Der vorliegende Beitrag diskutiert die Gründe, warum Popper mehrere wichtige Probleme der demokratischen Theorie ignoriert und mißversteht, und daß seine Theorie der Demokratie deswegen fehlerhaft und unvollkommen ist. Poppers Mangel am Interesse für die Standardprobleme der demokratischen Theorie erklärt sich daraus, daß er von einer Theorie der ungehemmten Souveränität ausgeht. Obwohl Popper mit den empirischen Feststellungen mancher Demokratieforscher einverstanden ist, daß z.B. die Bürger die Politik in Wirklichkeit nicht bestimmen, daß sie an der Regierungsgewalt nicht teilnehmen und sie damit nicht herrschen, regen ihn solche Feststellungen nicht sonderlich auf. Entscheidend ist, daß die Bürger ihre Herrscher los werden können. Nur wenn dies Kriterium erfüllt ist, kann man behaupten, die Regierung sei eine Regierung des Volkes. (ICE)

In 1945 Professor K. R. Popper published a work on political theory called The Open Society and Its Enemies. It extols the "open" as against the "closed" society and criticizes those thinkers who have supposedly advocated the closed society. The first volume is concerned with criticizing Plato, whom Popper believes to be the chief totalitarian theorist of the ancient world; the second volume with the criticism of Hegel and Marx as the chief totalitarian theorists of modern Europe. This article sets out to refute what Popper says about Plato. Space forbids a defence of Hegel, although such a defence would be valuable these days when some men choose a few political sentences from Hegel, detach them from his central philosophic position, and put him in the same category as Marx. Nevertheless, Plato is a greater genius even than Hegel, so that the refutation of Popper's position can rest on what he says about the greatest of philosophers.Such a defence is incumbent on a philosopher in these days, when no adequate understanding of Plato can be assumed. Indeed in North America, where the fides implictta of the social scientists has been empirical and pragmatic, Popper's thesis is liable to convince; for it is in essence a justification of that pragmatic tradition against the rationalism of Plato. Men who want to believe that there is such a thing as an independent "social science" can find in Popper reasons for doing so.

This article's goals are twofold: to demonstrate the fallacy of Popper's depiction of the Athenian democracy in the 5th century BC, especially of its longtime leader Pericles; & to defend Thucydides from Popper's completely unfounded allegations of bias. In line with his vision of an eternal struggle against totalitarianism, Popper attempts to counterbalance totalitarian attitudes whose roots he finds in Plato by expressing the then positive values. He offsets Pericles to Plato, & the Athenian democracy to Plato's idea of the state inspired by Sparta. Popper first finds an enemy & only then constructs the "open society." Democracy in Athens, which Popper advances as a prototype of the open society, in practice, had very little in common with that concept. However, everything that cannot be incorporated into his concept, Popper simply ignores, distorts, & changes. The author dissects Popper's account of the Athenian democracy, & dwells on Pericles's famous funeral oration. He describes how Popper devised the term "open society" by taking Pericles's words out of context, not even shying from using an (altogether) faulty translation of Thucydides. 24 References. Adapted from the source document.

This article's goals are twofold: to demonstrate the fallacy of Popper's depiction of the Athenian democracy in the 5th century BC, especially of its longtime leader Pericles; & to defend Thucydides from Popper's completely unfounded allegations of bias. In line with his vision of an eternal struggle against totalitarianism, Popper attempts to counterbalance totalitarian attitudes whose roots he finds in Plato by expressing the then positive values. He offsets Pericles to Plato, & the Athenian democracy to Plato's idea of the state inspired by Sparta. Popper first finds an enemy & only then constructs the "open society." Democracy in Athens, which Popper advances as a prototype of the open society, in practice, had very little in common with that concept. However, everything that cannot be incorporated into his concept, Popper simply ignores, distorts, & changes. The author dissects Popper's account of the Athenian democracy, & dwells on Pericles's famous funeral oration. He describes how Popper devised the term "open society" by taking Pericles's words out of context, not even shying from using an (altogether) faulty translation of Thucydides. 24 References. Adapted from the source document.

Intro -- Acknowledgments -- Contents -- About the Editors and Contributors -- About the Editor -- About the Contributors -- Contributors -- Chapter 1: General Introduction -- Part I: Popper and Politics in Africa -- Chapter 2: Popper's Politics in the Light of African Values -- 2.1 Introducing Popper in Relation to Africa -- 2.2 A Sketch of Popper's Politics -- 2.3 An Afro-communal Ethic -- 2.4 Popper's Politics and the Afro-communal Ethic -- 2.5 Concluding Remarks -- References -- Chapter 3: Karl Popper's Social Engineering: Piecemeal or 'Many-Pieces-at-Once'? -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Understanding Piecemeal Engineering -- 3.3 Piecemeal Social Engineering as a Method of Changing Society -- 3.4 Towards Social Engineering: Piecemeal or 'Many-Pieces-at-Once'? -- 3.5 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 4: Africa's Development Crisis and the Limits of Popper's Negative Utilitarianism -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Karl Popper's Negative Utilitarianism -- 4.3 The Minimalist and Welfarist Approaches to State Management -- 4.4 Africa and the Crises of Development -- 4.5 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 5: Karl Popper, the Nigerian State and Democratic Consolidation -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 The State, Democracy and Democratic Consolidation -- 5.3 The State and Democracy Consolidation: Whither Nigeria? -- 5.4 Towards Democratic Consolidation: What Is to Be Done? -- 5.5 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 6: The Distinctive Character of Popper's Critical Rationalism -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Science and the Empirical Basis -- 6.3 Metaphysics and Its Appraisal -- 6.4 Popper's Political Thought -- 6.5 Toleration -- 6.6 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 7: Tolerance, Multiculturalism and the Search for National Unity -- 7.1 Introduction -- 7.2 Multiculturalism -- 7.3 On Tolerance and Toleration -- 7.4 The Paradoxes of Tolerance.

Popper und Hayek, beide gebürtige Wiener, betonen in ihren Schriften gelegentlich die geistige Verwandtschaft in ihren Gedanken. Trotz dieser Gemeinsamkeiten gibt es gewichtige Unterschiede vor allem in ihrem Liberalismusverständnis. Der Autor zeigt, daß Popper politischen Interventionen in die Wirtschaft viel mehr Raum läßt als Hayek. Folgender Frage wird nachgegangen: Entspricht nicht das "piecemeal social engineering", Poppers Stückwerk-Sozialtechnik, dem von Hayek kritisierten "konstruktiven Rationalismus"? Für Hayek ist dieser Rationalismus deshalb unakzeptabel, weil er die Fähigkeiten der menschlichen Rationalität überschätzt und glaubt, daß die konstruktive Planung immer ein besseres Ergebnis bringen kann als der selbstregulierende Prozeß durch die spontane Ordnung, durch die "unsichtbare Hand". Im Gegensatz zu Hayek glaubt Popper, daß wissenschaftliche Befunde über die unbeabsichtigten Effekte politischen Handelns trotz der grundsätzlichen Fehlbarkeit der menschlichen Vernunft in die Politik einbringbar sind. (ICE)

Se presenta una breve biografía con objeto de ubicar al Filósofo de la Ciencia en su contexto histórico, como uno de los más importantes pensadores del siglo XX, además de que sus ideas han tenido influencia no solamente en las Ciencias Sociales sino que también han alcanzado a las Ciencias Exactas.