Suchergebnisse

Reanalyzing political biographies of Benito Mussolini & Osvald Mosley the author is testing the hypothesis that ideologies like fascism start with fairly innocent ideas and, given the right circumstances, develop in a quasi-logical way on a downward path towards their malignant maturity. With "quasi-logical" the author means something similar to Karl R. Popper's concept "logic of the situation," that is, the logic is neither formal nor strictly deterministic; it follows that actors are not exempt from moral responsibility, you can always choose to act against the logic of the situation. The author finds that an exalted "communitarianism" is an essential factor in the development of fascism. A part of the "logic" is that a demagogue elevating the value of the group, be it "nation," "church," "class," or anything, on the expense of the individual needs the picture of all ugly & evil enemy in order to get the members to obliterate themselves & merge into the group. Accordingly, in a classification of political ideologies the first question to be asked is: "individualism or anti-individualism." The author objects to Sheri Berman's suggestion that communitarianism explains the success of the Swedish Social Democracy during the twentieth century & will instead of that explanation propose "reformism," that is, a non-revolutionary strategy for political transformation. Adapted from the source document.

Karl Popper's strong attachment to music is seldom observed. He expresses strong opinions about what is good & bad in that field. Are these opinions just expressions of his subjective preferences? No, it is obvious that Popper finds a place for musical values in his "world 3." One of the aims of Popper's theory of the three worlds is to solve the body-mind problem; another is to demonstrate the possibility of objective knowledge. As the case of music indicates, world 3 does not consist of just factual knowledge; even values have a place there. Each world is said to be autonomous but interacting. What Popper has to say about the interaction between world 1 & world 2 is a polemic against the thesis that mental processes can be reduced to the physical. In the same way, the interaction between worlds 2 & 3 contradicts the idea that knowledge can be reduced to knowing & values to evaluation. Although Popper wrote Objective Knowledge, & accordingly is suspected of being a "positivist," it is, on the other hand, also possible to pick up arguments to accuse him of "decisionism." For example, he says that there is nothing that strictly compels the researcher to accept a falsification; after evaluating the results he has to make a decision. More fundamentally, nothing compels Popper or anyone to choose a critical-rationalistic philosophy. For Popper's part, such an attitude to life seems to be the only alternative to violence, & Popper insists that he hates violence. That means that objectivism follows from a fundamental ethical choice. Even the second word in the title Objective Knowledge may mislead the unprepared reader. The fact is, that Popper emphasizes how uncertain & limited our rational knowledge is. One might ask how it is possible to survive under such conditions. The answer is that we provisionally have to trust a lot of "knowledge" that is not rationally grounded. Does that means that anything goes? No, in life as in science we have to start with what is delivered, traditional, but we also should make our best to refine it into rational knowledge. Popper's acceptance of "metaphysics" is what separates him from the "positivists." From this it can already be anticipated that Popper is a "reformist," & that is what interests us as political scientists. 36 References. Adapted from the source document.

A reading of David Hume with the intent to highlight components of a reformistic approach to social change. The well-known formulation about "reason as the slave of passions" poses the first problem. In spite of this, it is maintained that reason plays a decisive role in Hume's theory of knowledge as in his practice as a political philosopher. Connected with this problem is Hume's skepticism, which is based on the discovery of the logical impossibility of inductive inference. However, this theoretical skepticism does not lead to defeatism regarding the possibility of improving knowledge & society; it just leads to modesty &, paradoxically, to an even more important role for reason. A parallel to Hume's criticism of induction is his demonstration of the impossibility of deducing values from facts. Again, it is necessary to notice the difference between his theoretical position & his recommendations for politics. The task of the historian is to give a causal explanation of social institutions &, on the basis of this, point out values inherent in the institutions. This gives the instrument for a rational discussion of maintaining or reforming the institutions. Obviously, Hume is a relativist, but not in the usual & careless meaning of individual or collective subjectivism. Values are produced by men in a historical process, but as they stand before the historian & the politician, they are as objective as facts. Finally, it is worth mentioning that Hume with his view of the importance of an informed & critical discussion of social problems comes close to critical-rationalism. 28 References. Adapted from the source document.

In Karl Popper's famous book, The Open Society and Its Enemies, appears the formulation social engineering. That is an unfortunate wording. There is nothing mechanical in Popper's political strategy. The keywords are rather piece-meal & trial & error. It is even possible to characterize Popper as -- up to a point -- anti-rationalistic. His warning that we should not think too much of our knowledge of the functioning of the social world & of our ability to make forecasts, reminds one of what a critic of the French Revolution like Edmund Burke had to say. We should start with the delivered institutions, diagnose what is working badly &, aware of possible error, try to improve it. That said, one is not surprised of meeting a strain of antipolitics in Popper's philosophy. Although Popper welcomes measures to clear away suffering & distress, it is uncertain how he would balance his negative utilitarianism against individual freedom. He is distrustful of political power. The idea that democracy gives the people the instrument of governing is an illusion. Democracy's point is to make it possible to dismiss a government (notice the parallel with his methodology, a government is a kind of hypothesis, the election an opportunity for falsification.) However, it is not Popper's political philosophy in a substantial meaning that makes him worth studying, but his theory of the critical discourse, a theory that is very relevant for a reformistic political strategy. The idea of the Popperian discourse is not to get the parties closer emotionally, not to reach a compromise, not even to convince, but for me to listen to & learn from the criticism of my hypotheses. People with divergent standpoints should not be kept out of the discourse, they should be welcomed. Popper admires Greek culture up to Socrates & he emphasizes its openness to influences from other cultures along the shores of the Mediterranean. That is in keeping with Popper's antinationalism. Nationalism fattens stupidity & is often the cause of devastating violence. In his later works Popper regularly uses an evolutionary model & his theory of language is no exception. He sets forth how the development of describing, language's third function besides expressing & warning, created the possibility of storytelling. Now, stories can be true & false, & that makes language's fourth function necessary, the function of argumentation, of proving or disproving of what has been said. Lying, however, is a wonderful invention. To lie, to say what is not, but could be true, is a nursery for fantasy & creativeness. 33 References. Adapted from the source document.