Reviews for Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story of a Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers

The average rating for Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story of a Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers based on 2 reviews is 4.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2015-01-11 00:00:00 Gustavo Chavez Wittgenstein's poker: the story of a ten minute argument between ‭‭‭two great philosophers‬‏‬, David Edmonds, John Eidinow Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story of a Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers is a 2001 book by BBC journalists David Edmonds and John Eidinow about events in the history of philosophy involving Sir Karl Popper and Ludwig Wittgenstein, leading to a confrontation at the Cambridge University Moral Sciences Club in 1946. On 25 October 1946, Popper (then at the London School of Economics), was invited to present a paper entitled "Are There Philosophical Problems?" at a meeting of the Moral Sciences Club, which was chaired by Wittgenstein. The two started arguing vehemently over whether there existed substantial problems in philosophy, or merely linguistic puzzles'the position taken by Wittgenstein. In Popper's, and the popular account, Wittgenstein used a fireplace poker to emphasize his points, gesturing with it as the argument grew more heated. When challenged by Wittgenstein to state an example of a moral rule, Popper (later) claimed to have replied "Not to threaten visiting lecturers with pokers", upon which (according to Popper) Wittgenstein threw down the poker and stormed out. Wittgenstein's Poker collects and characterizes the accounts of the argument, as well as establishing the context of the careers of Popper, Wittgenstein and Bertrand Russell, also present at the meeting. تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز دوازدهم ماه ژانویه سال 2005 میلادی عنوان: ویتگنشتاین - پوپر و ماجرای سیخ بخاری: ده دقیقه جدال میان دو فیلسوف بزرگ؛ اثر: دیوید ادموندز؛ جان آدینو؛ مترجم: حسن کامشاد؛ مشخصات نشر: تهران، نشر نی، 1383، در 358 ص، مصور، جدول، عکس، شابک: 9643127230 و 9789643127237، کتابنامه ص 333 تا 341 و به صورت زیرنویس، نمایه دارد، چاپ سوم 1386؛ چاپ پنجم 1392؛ موضوع: لودویگ ویتگنشتاین و کارل ریموند پوپر، فلسفه آلمانی - سده 20 م در شامگاه روز بیست و پنجم ماه اکتبر سال 1946 مبلادی، در اتاقی شلوغ و پرهیاهو در کیمبریج، لودویگ ویتگنشتاین و کارل پوپر برای نخستین و آخرین بار با هم روبرو شدند و تقریباً بلافاصله شایعه در اکناف جهان پیچید که این دو، مجهز به سیخ‌های آختهٔ بخاری، به جان هم افتادند... «آن ده دقیقه بنیاد جهان فلسفه ی غرب را حسابی تکان داد... نویسندگان این کتاب نیز برهان بسیار خوبی پیدا کرده‌ و ماجرا را به طرزی دلپذیر بازگو کرده اند». مجله تایم نیز: دیدار پوپر و ویتگنشتاین را، بسان برخورد تایتانیک و کوه یخ گریزناپذیر می‌پندارد. ا. شربیانی

Review # 2 was written on 2007-03-24 00:00:00 Michael Knight Karl Popper's a sad case. One of the greatest geniuses of the last century, he was an analytical philosopher par excellence at the exact moment when everyone started to ignore analytical philosophy. But at least he got to survive to see himself become extinct. Wittgenstein and Popper were from opposite sides of the tracks in Vienna, both had taught school for a little while, both Jews who escaped the Anschluss (Wittgenstein with a bit more dignity than Popper), but beyond some superficial biographical similarities they couldn't have been more different. Wittgenstein was cerebral, a charismatic child prodigy with a religious bent; Popper was practical, a cranky tyrant, a social animal. Popper had readers; Wittgenstein had followers (many of whom undoubtedly had no idea what he was talking about.) Wittgenstein said (unhelpfully) of morality that whereof we cannot speak, thereover we must pass in silence; Popper ruefully exclaimed that belief in reality is the ultimate moral imperative. Naturally, someone decided to stage a showdown, and gave it a name: "Are There Philosophical Problems?" This book tells the story of what may or may not have happened, who may have threatened the other with a poker and with what purpose in mind, but it's also a panoramic survey of prewar Viennese philosophy, as fertile a bunch of intellects as have ever found themselves in one place. The philosophy is a little watered down, but not so much as to be meaningless. This book's worth reading if you're curious about either Wittgenstein or Popper, though I think Popper comes off a little poorly... but unfortunately, I wasn't there.