The Future of Critical Rationalism
Hopefully, critical rationalism will improve. The best way to improve is to be open to criticism and respond to it with no defensiveness. Future criticism is unpredictable, but one can seek weak spots that invite criticism. It is not easy to view Popper’s institutionalism as minimal; it should be minimal in different ways, relative to diverse ends, theoretical and practical, just as critical rationalism is minimalist and as the minimum is relative to ends. Popper’s third world is a meta-institution of sorts, and efforts to apply it to diverse problems are welcome in a minimal manner. Finally, Popper declared optimism obligatory; this is open to interpretation the way Jarvie viewed utopianism as useful for diverse ends, thus criticizing Popper’s anti-utopianism.
My gratitude to Nimrod Bar-Am and Raphael Sassower for their help.
- Gellner, Ernest. 1996. The Psychoanalytic Movement: The Cunning of Unreason. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
- von Hayek, Friedrich. 1960. The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Jarvie, Ian C. 1986. Thinking About Society: Theory and Practice. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- Popper, Karl R. 1945/1962. The Open Society and Its Enemies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 1957. The Poverty of Historicism. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
- Wolfson, Harry A. 1934. The Philosophy of Spinoza. Cleveland and New York: Meridian Books.Google Scholar