Popper's Open Society After Fifty Years
presents a coherent survey of the reception and influence of Karl Popper's masterpiece The Open Society and its Enemies over the fifty years since its publication in 1945, as well as applying some of its principles to the context of modern Eastern Europe.
This unique volume contains papers by many of Popper's contemporaries and friends, including such luminaries as Ernst Gombrich, in his paper 'The Open Society and its Enemies: Remembering its Publication Fifty Years Ago'.
routledge.com

.

.

It is one's duty to be an optimist .     Only from this point of view can one be active and do what one can.    If you are a pessimist, you have given up.   We must remain optimists, we have to look at the world from the point of view of how beautiful it is, and to try to do what we can to make it better .
interview  and   the open society and the democratic state in after fifty years

fb/kp

One can abuse the freedom of speech and of the press, for example, by giving out false information or by instigating a revolt .   In just the same way, the state power can abuse any limitation of freedom .
We need freedom to prevent the state from abusing its power, and we need the state to prevent the abuse of freedom .
reflections on the democratic state

fb/kp

Yes, despite all this I remain an optimist toward the world .   It is one's duty to be an optimist .   Only from this point of view can one be active and do what one can .   If you are a pessimist, you have given up .   We must remain optimists, we have to look at the world from the point of view of how beautiful it is, and to try to do what we can to make it better  .
interview with adam chmielewski - popper's open society after 50 years
fb/kp
.

AFTER THE OPEN SOCIETY

The position between optimism and pessimism which I am trying to establish may be briefly described as follows.
I agree with the pessimists that there is no justification for the claim of any particular theory or assertion to be true. Thus there is no justification of any claim to know, including the claims of scientific knowledge. But this merely means that all knowledge, including scientific knowledge, is hypothetical or conjectural: it is uncertain, fallible. This certainly does not mean that every assertion is as good as any other, competing, assertion. For we can discuss our various competing assertions, our conjectures, critically; and the result of the critical discussion is that we find out why some among the competing conjectures are better than others.
Accordingly, I agree with the optimists that our knowledge can grow, and can progress; for we can sometimes justify the verdict of our critical discussions when it ranks certain conjectures higher than others.
A verdict of this kind always appraises our conjectures or theories from the point of view of their approach to truth: although we cannot justify any claim that a theory is true, we can sometimes give good reasons for asserting that one theory is better than another, or even than all its competitors. In this way our knowledge can grow, and science can progress.

...

To be an individualist means to see in every human individual an end in itself, and not merely a means to further other interests, for example, those of the state .   It does not mean to take one's own individuality particularly seriously, or to lay more stress - or even as much - on one's own interests than on the interests of others.
chapter 7

...

 It is therefore no accident that Western Society is the only known society in which science has really flourished. And it has not merely flourished, it is here that science has first become the basis of economic life. Only in an open society is science unfettered. Admittedly, a closed society which is forced to compete with an open society is likely to allow its scientists a degree of freedom which is needed to avoid economic stagnation (or defeat in the armaments race). But though it may extol science for its service to the state, it will always be suspicious of it. For science is no respecter of any dogma or authority and it cannot, in the long run, respect the totalitarian or authoritarian dogma which forms the basis of any closed society. the open society and the democratic state - after the open society
I believe that to be alive is a very great gift.
Life is marvellously wonderful, and we should all be deeply grateful to be alive. I myself most of all, for I have lived for a long time. We should be grateful for the great gifts which we all constantly receive from others: from men and women, from those who are alive and others who are dead. We have the example of uncounted men and women, many of whom have suffered and many of whom have loved life in spite of suffering, and who have done their best to help others, and ourselves.
...

Agreement is comparatively unimportant in the search for truth: we may easily both be mistaken. People did strongly agree, for a very long time, on many erroneous doctrines (such as the Ptolemaic system of the world); and agreement is often the result of the fear of intolerance, or even of violence.

...

Democracy consists in the control of political power. That is the main pont of a democracy.
after the open society 1988  - fb/kp

.
.

The member of a free society and citizen of a free state has certainly a duty of loyalty to the state, because the existence of the state is essential for the continuance of the society, and he will serve the state when the need arises. And yet, it is also his duty to combine with his loyalty a certain degree of vigilance, and even a certain degree of distrust of the state and its officers: it is his duty to watch and see that the state does not overstep the limits of its legitimate functions. For the institutions of the state are powerful, and where there is power there is always the danger of its misuse – and a danger to freedom. All power has a tendency to entrench itself, and a tendency to corrupt; and in the last resort it is only the traditions of a free society – which includes a tradition of almost jealous watchfulness on the part of its citizens – which can balance the power of the state by providing those checks and controls on which all freedom depends.
the open society and the democratic state - fb/kp

paradise is lost
chapter 10

economic power must not be permitted to dominate political power

we could then say that rationalism is an attitude of readiness to listen to critical arguments and to learn from experience .    It is fundamentally an attitude of admitting that   ' I may be wrong and you may be right,   and by an effort,   we may get nearer to the truth  ' .

now the adoption of an anti-equalitarian attitude in political life, i.e. in the field of problems concerned with the power of man over man, is just what i should call criminal .    for it offers a justification of the attitude that different categories of people have different rights;  that the master has the right to enslave the slave;    that some men have the right to use others as their tools.    ultimately, it will be used,   as in plato,   to justify murder   .
the open society and its enemies

.

I NEMICI DELLA SOCIETA' APERTA
La società aperta teorizzata da Popper è antitetica rispetto a quella totalitaria: nel solco del liberalismo, il filosofo pensa a un modello nel quale l’individuo conti più dell’astratta somma delle parti su cui si fonda lo stato etico platonico o hegelo-marxista; nella società aperta il mondo ha il diritto di evolversi e le regole che lo governano si possono modificare come l’epidermide asseconda la crescita del corpo.
Le regole, secondo Popper, sono la garanzia della parità di condizioni e nel suo ultimo intervento pubblico – Cattiva maestra televisione – il filosofo prende parola sullo strumento principale della manipolazione del consenso e sui suoi pericoli. Se non c’è libero accesso ai media e se questi sono in mano a persone senza scrupoli e privi di senso di responsabilità in rapporto all’impiego di tali strumenti, la democrazia è in grave pericolo.
Strana sorte quella di Popper, avere difeso la democrazia contro i suoi nemici e poi aver visto i suoi cosiddetti ‘amici’ lottare quasi ovunque per appropriarsi dell’egemonia mediatica, svuotando, di fatto, la società della sua autentica, indispensabile apertura.
Un dibattito in classe sul tema della ‘società aperta’, capace di attraversare gran parte del programma sia di filosofia che di storia o delle diverse letterature, può consentire agli studenti una rilettura critica su molti autori. Oppure, attualizzando ulteriormente, può permettere di riflettere sul fatto che la società in cui viviamo non sia poi così ‘aperta’.
Roberto Lolli - aetnanet.org

La pratica non è il nemico della conoscenza teorica ma il suo più valido incentivo.   Benché una certa dose di disinteresse si addica allo scienziato, ci sono molti esempi che dimostrano che non è sempre importante per uno scienziato essere così disinteressato.   Ma è importante per lui restare in contatto con la realtà, con la pratica, perché coloro che la trascurano ne pagano il fio cadendo nello scolasticismo.

la società aperta e i suoi nemici

.

Reason, like language, can be said to be a product of social life.

A Robinson Crusoe (marooned in early childhood) might be clever enough to master many difficult situations; but he would invent neither language nor the art of argumentation. Admittedly, we often argue with ourselves; but we are accustomed to do so only because we have learned to argue with others, and because we have learned in this way that the argument counts, rather than the person arguing. (This last consideration cannot, of course, tip the scales when we argue with ourselves.) Thus we can say that we owe our reason, like our language, to intercourse with other men.

...

man has created new worlds - of language - of music - of poetry - of science - and the most important of these is the world of the moral demands - for equality - for freedom and for helping the weak .

the open society and its enemies - cap 5

...

ON THE PARADOX OF TOLERANCE
The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that freedom in the sense of absence of any constraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek. The idea is, in a slightly different form, and with very different tendency, clearly expressed in Plato. Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.

We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

Dovremmo rivendicare, nel nome della tolleranza, il diritto a non tollerare gli intolleranti .

We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

... 

To educate oneself so as to adopt an attitude of scepticism towards one's causal theories, and one of intellectual modesty, is, without doubt, one of the most important moral duties .

...

only by planning step by step for institutions to safeguard freedom - especially freedom - from exploitation can we hope to achieve a better world .

... 

We can never return to the alleged innocence and beauty of the closed society.    Our dream of heaven cannot be realized on earth. Once we begin to rely upon our reason, and to use our powers of criticism, once we feel the call of personal responsibilities, and with it, the responsibility of helping to advance knowledge, we cannot return to a state of implicit submission to tribal magic .

chapter 10

...

In all matters, we can only learn by trial and error, by making mistakes and improvements; we can never rely on inspiration, although inspirations may be most valuable as long as they can be checked by experience.
chapter 9

... 

we can discover the fact that we had a prejudice only after having got rid of it  .

...

Reason, like science,   grows by way of mutual criticism; the only possible way of 'planning' its growth is to develop those institutions that safeguard the freedom of this criticism, that is to say, the freedom of thought.

...

We should realize that from the moral point of view suffering and happiness must not be treated as symmetrical; that is to say, the promotion of happiness is in any case much less urgent than the rendering of help to those who suffer, and the attempt to prevent suffering.
chapter 5

...

The theory that the human race might live a little longer if it had not made the fatal mistake of helping the weak is most questionable; but even if it were true - is mere length of survival of the race really all we want? Or is the almost perfect man-beast so eminently valuable that we should prefer a prolongation of his existence (he did exist for quite a long time, anyway) to our experiment of helping the weak?
Mankind, I believe, has not done so badly. In spite of the treason of some of its intellectual leaders, in spite of the stupefying effects of Platonic methods in education and the devastating results of propaganda, there have been some surprising successes. Many weak men have been helped, and for nearly a hundred years slavery has been practically abolished. Some say it will soon be re-introduced. I feel more optimistic; and, after all, it will depend on ourselves. But even if all this should be lost again, and even if we had to return to the almost perfect man-beast, this would not alter the fact that once upon a time (even if the time was short), slavery did disappear from the face of the earth. This achievement and its memory may, I believe, compensate some of us for all our misfits, mechanical or otherwise; and it may even compensate some of us for the fatal mistake made by our forefathers when they missed the golden opportunity of arresting all change—of returning to the cage of the closed society and establishing, for ever and ever, a perfect zoo of almost perfect monkeys.
nota 71 cap 10

...

Those who prefer one step towards a distant ideal to the realization of a piecemeal compromise should always remember that if the ideal is very distant, it may even become difficult to say whether the step taken was towards or away from it.

the open society and Its enemies - fb/kp - books.google.be

 .

Io sostengo che una delle caratteristiche di una società aperta sia di tenere in gran conto, oltre alla forma democratica di governo, la libertà di associazione, e di proteggere e anche incoraggiare la formazione di sotto-società libere, ciascuna delle quali possa sostenere differenti opinioni e credenze.

kp

   la Società Aperta è aperta a tutti tranne che agli intolleranti  

Errore che è alla base dell’individuo libero

“è libero chi non si limita ad agire a casaccio, ma controlla i risultati dei suoi tentativi casuali, e perciò apprende dai suoi errori, e in più, mira esplicitamente a trovare le falle delle proprie provvisorie soluzioni”.
Difatti Popper, elaborando i concetti di nuvole (sistemi fisici complessi, irregolari, disordinati e difficilmente prevedibili) e di orologi (sistemi fisici regolari, ordinati e altamente prevedibili), si inserisce nella disputa tra indeterministi e deterministi, cercando una posizione intermedia. Egli, infatti, sebbene tenda maggiormente verso la teoria indeterministica, che rappresenta un prerequisito necessario per ogni dottrina della libertà, afferma che la semplice ammissione del caso non giustifica di per se stessa la credenza in questo valore. La libertà risiede nel “controllo plastico” del comportamento tramite i principi della razionalità critica: possono essere considerati liberi, ossia liberamente progettanti la loro condotta, “quei sistemi organici complessi, come gli esseri umani, che, in primo luogo, ricercano le soluzioni per le loro esigenze vitali, selezionando entro un insieme di tentativi o ipotesi di soluzione emersi casualmente, e che, in secondo luogo, mettono consapevolmente alla prova tali tentativi o ipotesi, nell’intento di fare emergere il prima possibile i loro eventuali difetti”.

liceopertini.net

vialattea.net  

www.unav.es/gep/Popdet.html