Spengler vs. Popper on History | by Andrew Fentem

[@akbar-nr4kc]

I have question please answer colin mcginn idea of new mysterianism and zizekain and todd mcgowan interaprtation of hegelain philosphy of contridiction which say we can know anythings through contridictions which one of above is mostly valid and correct in today modern world .? Plz answer

[@andrew_70bob4]

@@akbar-nr4kc Of Spengler and Popper? I don't think it's a question of correctness but rather of scope and influence.

[@akbar-nr4kc]

Espically in metaphysical questions who is more correct and who had more scope and influence in your point of view and also why

[@andrew_70bob4]

@@akbar-nr4kc That's in the video I think.

[@rideforever]

I do not believe these two are comparable. Spengler was a highly learned man and spoke effortlessly about history ancient and modern with countless subtle currents feelings trends arts, moment in time, his knowledge was gigantic and his ability to drive a river through it demonstrated extreme power. Popper by contrast simply denied everything - which requires little effort at all. One man makes titanic effort, the other none. Popper comes from a Jewish background and within that culture are strong currents of confusion and self-struggle which is often reflected ... being chosen people and hated people .... being a lost tribe, being loved and condemned by Moses. These struggles may tie up a man so much that his work never leaves them and is not meaningful for those not suffering from these neuroses. Anyway the question is really about leaving the earth therefore the answers are not found on the earth but above it.

[@andrew_70bob4]

You just did.

[@freddypowell7292]

@@andrew_70bob4 Apples are unlike oranges in that they are generally divided into a number of distinct segments.

[@andrew_70bob4]

@@freddypowell7292 Both have epistemologies, which overlap.

[@freddypowell7292]

@@andrew_70bob4 Oranges and apples?

[@andrew_70bob4]

@@freddypowell7292 don't overlap except in the category fruit.