Talk:The Open Society and Its Enemies

Philosophy: Literature / Social and political / Contemporary Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Social and political philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Archives

Archive 1

The spell or the age of Plato?

The text of this article subtitles vol 1 as "the spell of Plato" which matches my copy, and numerous online references, and the material of the book. The image however is "the age of Plato" which is odd William M. Connolley (talk) 16:12, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extensive rewrite of the summary, 2023-02-22

Today, 2023-02-22, I have completely remade the summary section of this article, summarizing the book in a way that reflects its table of contents, and highlighting Popper's key concepts and their definitions. I am making a note of this in case someone has complaints about this major revision and would like to add them in a reply to me here. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 19:08, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a fan, TBH. What was there before was punchier, and gave a better flavour of the book and Popper's argument. Yours veers off into blandness William M. Connolley (talk) 21:02, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the details about the book should be preserved, especially the highlighted terms that Popper defines in the book, and the new summary addresses the issues mentioned in earlier talk page comments about the summary overemphasizing some parts of the book and downplaying others, since now every chapter is covered, and the summary has become more easily extensible. However, your criticism inspired me to add a paragraph to the introduction section that preserves many elements of the earlier summary, which should help people get a simple "punchy" overview of the book along the lines of what the page used to say. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 21:29, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Archived outdated comments, 2023-07-02

I have archived most of this talk page, creating archive 1. Most of it was outdated by the time I wrote the topic about my major revision, but I think I didn't know how to make archives back then. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 01:31, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]