After offering an overview of some of the main themes of Popper’s political thought, the paper argues that his account faces two problems relating to institutions. The first is that while Popper stresses the ‘rational unity of mankind’, and the potential for any of us to furnish criticisms of public policy, it is not clear what institutional means currently exist for this to enable this to take place. Second, Popper has stressed the conjectural character of even our best theories. However, at any point, some theories will have fared better in the face of criticism than others, and they may give us important information about constraints on our actions. At the same time, as ordinary citizens we may not be in a good position to understand the theories in question, let alone appraise the state of the specialised discussion of them. There is, it is suggested, a case for thinking of ways to institutionally entrench such fallible theories, especially in the current setting in which social media play an important role

One may say that The open society and Its Enemies (OS) offered in 1945 the first complete elaboration of the general approach proposed by Karl Popper, namely his ‘critical rationalism’, a bold generalization of the fallibilist falsificationism in the domain of the empirical sciences masterly proposed in Logik der Forschung (1934). The political content of The OS has been critically discussed. Nevertheless, not all people insist on the equally important moral dimension of the book, giving it its unity, I submit. Without morality, no critical discussion, no reason, no open society, let us say in a nutshell. I would argue that according to Popper, a strictly Christian morality of love would not be the appropriate emotional companion of critical rationalism, but that the less demanding moral emotion of sympathy or compassion is perhaps necessary to give it its force against violence. I give some support to this line of argument. In my view, Popper proposed a somewhat unarticulated critical rationalist ‘emotivism’ of sorts. The emotion of compassion is necessary for triggering our moral decisions and values, which are the ultimate basis of the choice for a reason against violence.

The reception of Popper in Japan has not been a glorious history up to the present day. There have been numerous misunderstandings and distortions. It is important to record and discuss them in order to learn from them and to make use of his ideas in the Japanese intellectual climate. This is the purpose of the present paper. From the perspective of the reception history, we searched the reasons why Popper has been misunderstood in Japan (especially in four areas: philosophy, economics, history, and political philosophy), and tried to identify some of the factors responsible for this misunderstanding. To this end, we applied the method of “situational analysis” to the Japanese peculiar intellectual situation after the so-called après guerres, rather than by using a chronological order. If the causes of misunderstandings and distortions in Japan can be clarified by means of a situational analysis, we can learn a great deal from this history and can use this knowledge to throw new light on the status of critical rationalism in Japan

Notwithstanding Karl Popper’s deep admiration for ancient Greece and his affection for modern Greece, his work has been mostly viewed with caution by Greek scholars who, until relatively recently, often chose to either ignore or downplay it. This stance can be partially attributed to the novel approach of Popper’s critique to Plato which did not fare well with the foundational biases of modern Greek academic tradition and the prevailing intellectual inclinations of Greek scholars in the fields of the methodology of science and political theory. Although this bias has begun to recede during the last decades, there remains a lot to be done to fully integrate Popper’s work into the Greek intellectual and social discourse. Nevertheless, the establishment of the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at Athens University, along with the efforts of academics and public intellectuals, particularly during the Greek financial crisis of the last decade, have played a pivotal role in generating a broader interest in critical rationalism and popularizing Popper’s ideas among a wider audience. This paper examines the evolution of the reception of Popper’s ideas in Greece, both in scholarly circles and in public life, from the time of publication of his seminal work “The open society and its Enemies” until today, highlighting the efforts to foster a more comprehensive understanding of his important contributions

In this paper, I address the issue of the possible applicability of the ideas of Karl R. Popper’s social and political philosophy in the contemporary political life of postcolonial countries. Through reference to the reception of Popper’s philosophy in Central and Eastern Europe, I argue that Popper’s writings were effective in catalysing the political wholesale transformation by undermining Marxists’ pretensions to scientific status rather than through his anti-utopian and anti-revolutionary political recommendations. In the context of attempts to apply Popper’s ideas in postcolonial countries, especially Sub-Saharan Africa, I claim that the influence of Popper’s social thought on the politics of those countries may not be as effective as expected or desired.

Our analysis of Popper’s philosophy of science focuses on his concepts of tradition and situational analysis. These concepts represent innovative Popperian contributions to a historical and hermeneutical turn in philosophy of science that most of his critics, especially Kuhn, fail to recognize. According to his historical view, Popper conceives sciences as a complex of traditions in continuous transformation and progress by means of rational discussion of theories. In order to grasp the rational progress of scientific traditions, Popper proposes an original method that he calls “situational analysis”. This hermeneutical method seeks to understand the concepts, hypotheses, actions, practices, controversies and products that scientists made to solve problems in their specific historical contexts to improve the truth content of theories. In addition to his historical and hermeneutical turn, Popper also inquired about the social and political conditions for the progress of scientific traditions by means of intersubjective criticism of theories and conjectures. According to him, the rational discussion of ideas requires, as necessary conditions, plurality of ideas, intellectual humility, and freedom of thought and communication that can only exist in an open and democratic society. With these considerations, we may say that in addition to a historical and hermeneutical turn, Popper also contributed to a social and political turn in the philosophy of science

شروع هزاره سوم میلادی با انقلاب در مهندسی ژنتیک DNA و فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات همراه است و با سرعتی شتابان در حال دگرگون کردن ساختارهای اجتماعی و اقتصادی جوامع کهن بشری است. جامعه شبکه ای با ویژگیهای خاص خود تمامی بنیانهای جامعه نظیر اقتصاد، آموزش، فرهنگ، سیاست و، به ویژه، زمان و مکان را در حال تغییر و تحول مداوم و جهانی شدن می بیند و دولتهای ملی و محلی را، که در شرایط متعارف نماینده اراده و حاکمیت ملی و تمامیت ارضی خودند، در برابر فشارهای خوردکننده فرایند و جهانی که همه اجزای آن سیال و متغیر است قرار داده است. با حضور این فرایند اجتناب ناپذیر، که جدایی از آن غیر ممکن است، دولتها باید به مسوولیت عظیم خود در قبال جامعه توجه داشته باشند و آگاهی چگونه زیستن در این جامعه را برای تمامی مردم از طریق آموزش مادام العمر فراهم نمایند تا شاید از این طریق بتوانند از حذف اجتماعی افراد و به حاشیه رفتن آنها در شبکه قدرتمند جهانی جلوگیری کنند.دادن آموزش به حجم عظیمی از مردم جامعه در قالب آموزشهای سنتی و فضای فیزیکی موجود امکانپذیر نخواهد بود. اما تجربیات دانشگاههای باز و آموزش از راه دور در جامعه شبکه ای جایگاهی خاص پیدا خواهد کرد و می تواند نقش مهمی در آموزش، به ویژه آموزش بزرگسالان، در نظم نوین جهانی داشته باشد.

کارل پوپر، به دلیل مواضع اش راجع به فلسفه و روش علم، و نیز به خاطر جهت گیری هایش در اندیشه سیاسی، جایگاهی را در تاریخ اندیشه های سده بیستم کسب کرده است. سهم پوپر در فلسفه علم، عمدتا به نقد و تخطئه استقراگرایی و دفاع از ابطال گرایی مربوط می شود و سهم اصلی او در اندیشه سیاسی به دفاعی که از جامعه باز انجام داده برمی گردد. هم در روش علم و هم در اندیشه سیاسی تاکید او بر "خردباوری انتقادی" است. علم و روش آن الهام بخش مهمی برای کل فلسفه پوپر بوده است. اما دیدگاه او در فلسفه و روش علم با انتقاداتی روبرو شده است. اگر بپذیریم که فلسفه سیاسی پوپر در حدود امکانات روش شناسی او شکل گرفته است، آنگاه برای پرداختن به ناکارآمدی های برنامه پژوهشی او در خصوص جامعه باز باید بعضی محدودیت های روش شناسی وی مورد بررسی قرار گیرد.مقاله حاضر این ادعا را پیش می کشد که برنامه پژوهشی پوپر در خصوص جامعه باز در حدود امکانات روش شناسی او شکل گرفته و با کاستی ها و محدودیت هایی مواجه است. این مقاله با نگاهی انتقادی سعی می کند محدودیت های برنامه پژوهشی و نیز برخی جزمیت های "جامعه باز" پوپر را نشان دهد. به نظر می رسد برنامه پژوهشی پوپر راجع به جامعه باز، در برابر پرسش از تکثرگرایی بنیادی- که اساس معرفتی جامعه باز است، آسیب پذیر می نماید.

ساختمان معرفتی نظریۀ اجتماعی- سیاسی «جامعۀ باز» کارل پوپر(1902-1994 م) به عنوان اتوپیا و الگوی جامع نظری اصلاح طلبان غربگرا، بر روش ابطال گرایی در فلسفۀ علم او بنا شده است. پژوهش حاضر در پی ابطال عقلی این روش بود. روش: این پژوهش بین رشتۀ فلسفۀ سیاسی و معرفت شناسی فلسفی و به روش کتابخانه ای و توصیفی- انتقادی انجام شد. یافته ها: روش ابطال گرایی پوپر به عنوان ملاک علمیت همۀ نظریه های تجربی و سیاسی- اجتماعی اش، ارتباط مستقیم با تمام مؤلفه های نظریۀ جامعۀ باز(= لیبرال دموکراسی منفی) دارد؛ مؤلفه هایی چون: خردورزی انتقادی، نفی مرجعیت طلبی و تمامیت خواهی و تأکید بر تساهل و مدارا و نیز پلورالیسم معرفتی و دینی؛ با ابطال منطقی این روش نظریۀ جامعۀ باز نیز مخدوش شده است. نتیجه گیری: روش اثبات گرایی عقلی و کشفی و تجربی مبتنی بر امکان و بلکه ضرورت کسب معرفت یقینی که مورد تأکید فیلسوفان سیاسی و اجتماعی مسلمان است، به ادلّۀ عقلی بر روش ابطال گرایی پوپری تفوّق دارد.

This paper examines the liberal society that Popper lauds, that aims to be truly open, and discusses why another, more communitarian kind of society, particularly societies in Africa, may also reflect the quest for intellectual openness that is Popper’s ideal. Moreover, this paper avers reasons why Popper should be comfortable with such a liberal-communitarian mix. The inter-subjectivity in his critical rationalism is a balance of an explicit individualism, and an implicit social element (Afisi, 2016a). Popper is indeed an author of such a balance. For a society to be truly open requires the careful recognition and protection of individual freedom. However, the extent to which individuals are free to perform actions that they desire without external constraints, and the level of their individuality in relation to others when performing such actions, remain a contentious issue between liberals and more communitarian thinkers. Popper’s critical rationalism provides the necessary impetus to this contention through his view of freedom that I contend can best be viewed as carefully balanced, a view which combines individuality with a social element that upholds community values necessary for openness of society. With this combination, Popper’s politics of liberalism provides an effective model of how a truly open society can be achieved. The values inherent to Popper’s liberalism including those concerning intellectual openness, individual freedom, mutual respect, measured self-respect, welfarism, humanitarianism, accountability, critical debates and feedback from the citizens, together concern the conditions for a society to be truly open. There are many competing thoughts as to what openness might be in Popper’s philosophy. The present study of Popper does not presume to address them all. The focus here is specifically on using Popper’s idea of critical rationalism to balance relations between liberal politics of individual rights and freedom, and communitarian politics of the common good, as it relates to situations about how socio-economic and political conditions in Africa societies should be structured. While I contend that Popper’s works in political philosophy focused centrally on Western political tradition, and not about Africa in its strict sense, significant lessons can be distilled from Popper that can offer suggestions on social reforms in Africa. This paper explores Popper’s project of the open society across the plurality and differences of societies, so that his liberal ideas of individual freedom are not undermined, and the progress of the communitarian idea of the common good, that Africa societies are built upon, is also well enhanced. Liberal individualism and community values inherent to communitarianism are both well accommodated within Popper’s critical rationalism.