Submitted by TheStateOfException t3_zj2go4 in philosophy
Comments
vecinadeblog t1_iztm4vw wrote
Isaiah Berlin’s family moved to UK in 1921, when he was 12. I wouldn’t say they had to dodge Hitler. Also, in 1958 he was not a “refugee” but an established Russian-British philosopher.
[deleted] t1_iztr4t8 wrote
[deleted]
TheGrumpyre t1_izu46r4 wrote
I think there's a certain literary qualitiy to the "for want of a nail" view of historical events, where seemingly insignificant things have disproportionate effects on the world. But those events only stand out because they're ironically unexpected. Wars start because of tectonically sized movements of economies and political factions so vast that one single bullet could only make them flinch a little, but that doesn't make as memorable a story.
ReddRobben t1_izuds8o wrote
Not as arrogant as claiming to blow up an entire philosophy based on a knee-jerk response to one quote taken out of context though…umuhright?
ShalmaneserIII t1_izvcm83 wrote
> A pissed off Serbian with a revolver could destroy civilizations.
Yes, but why was he pissed off? Nationalism had to be invented somewhere.
CyberCircumcizd t1_izw8a6d wrote
I have to agree with others that the writing is very bad. After reading it twice, I have no idea what the author is trying to do. Although he seems to be strongly opposed to "globalization", he criticizes Wakism's critics as "power-hungry". It's like a high school essay. It is difficult to deny facts because they do not exist.
He combines cool, often irrelevant quotes like an alum trying to exceed word count.
I'm really surprised that this steamy pile got 300 votes.
CyberCircumcizd t1_izwa1xn wrote
answer
share it
Be careful
improve it
follow up
user avatar
level 2
online circle
·
Most of this article revolves around how to pay attention to negative thoughts. He repeats a very silly tautology: bad thoughts are bad. He inserts random information with little explanation or understanding of what he's saying. He cites the following quote from Rousseau to support the misconception that negative thoughts are built upon oneself.
[It] is based on a series of historical ideas, which may have developed one after another and were not created all at once in the human mind.
This story is about the development of personal and global wealth (especially when people developed complex social organizations, they lost their individuality but became stronger in another way). It says that there are some "bad thoughts that pile up on top of each other." This is his one of many examples of the author's ignorance of the cited literature.
This article was not worth my time.
CyberCircumcizd t1_j0ibemc wrote
I have to agree with others that writing is dangerous After reading it twice, I had no idea what the author was trying to do Although he appears to be against "globalisation", he has criticized liberal critics as "power hungry". It's like a high school story Facts are hard to deny because they don't exist
Sugary, often inappropriate words like alum are added in an attempt to expand the vocabulary.
I was surprised that this hot team got 300 votes
Answer
Tell your friends about it
Be careful
It is very appropriate
He followed him to the end
User transactions
Level 2 in
Gray on website
·.
A great part of this article is about dealing with negative thoughts He said something very stupid: negative thoughts are not good He gives random information without explaining or understanding what he is saying In support of the negative view supporting negative emotions, he cites the following passage from Russia
[It is based on] a historical concept, which can be made continuously and not once in the human mind
This story is about the development of individual and global assets (especially when people become socially connected, losing their identities but being empowered in other ways). "They pile negative thoughts on each other," he said. These are many examples of his ignorance of the author's subject
This article is not my best
silly_flying_dolphin t1_izvire7 wrote
A rambling and boring article written from the sidelines of souring culture wars to lament 'wokeism'...
ChocoboRaider t1_izvzdvl wrote
This article is not worth the pixels I read it through. Incoherent, deluded, and and actively dishonest.
GSilky t1_izuhihf wrote
Critical theory isn't bad, it's useful to a point. However, when one can only find problems, meaning is going to be lacking. The ultimate flaw of the program, IMO, is that change cannot happen without understanding; understanding tends to remove the urge for change. This is why I find the critical theory aggravating, if you don't understand it, how can you know what needs to change? Most of my dislike of critical theory stems from it being too easy and mostly rather boring in the end (perspective wise I prefer interaction theory), it's exciting when young and inexperienced, but personal experience should reveal how ultimately there is no answer or solution to anything offered by critical theory, just constant flux and power dynamics and questions without resolutions. This is a very unsatisfying view of the world that lived experience puts the lie to.
Sunstang t1_izvvq7n wrote
What a bloviating load of bollocks.
Perrr333 t1_izx6rv9 wrote
I have to assume most people upvoting this didn't read it? Because the title is interesting - it's attractive to believe in the power of philosophical ideas if you are into philosophy - but the actual article fails to really get into this other than just saying that Berlin said this.
BlueFootedBooblet t1_izxuq5n wrote
I think this is what you get when a conservative bashing wokeism tries to sound fancy and educated.
Sandman145 t1_izxvst2 wrote
A very confused philosopher.
TheStateOfException OP t1_iztblw6 wrote
Submission Statement:
On the 31st of October 1958, a middle-aged Russian refugee delivered his inaugural Oxford lecture. Today, that lecture is still read by students of political philosophy. It's called Two Concepts of Liberty. Berlin used the lecture to condense much of what he had learned about human nature from his rather remarkable upbringing. His family first had to flee revolutionary Russia, then dodge Hitler. Berlin has a famous line in the lecture:
​
>[...] philosophical concepts nurtured in the stillness of a professor's study could destroy a civilisation.
This article analyses the relevance of the idea for our own time, drawing links to the current culture wars and the importance of storytelling.