What do you think?
Rate this book
The Power of Ideas
The essays collected in this new volume reveal Isaiah Berlin at his most lucid and accessible. He was constitutionally incapable of writing with the opacity of the specialist, but these shorter, more introductory pieces provide the perfect starting-point for the reader new to his work. Those who are already familiar with his writing will also be grateful for this further addition to his collected essays.
The connecting theme of these essays, as in the case of earlier volumes, is the crucial social and political role--past, present and future--of ideas, and of their progenitors. A rich variety of subject-matters is represented--from philosophy to education, from Russia to Israel, from Marxism to romanticism--so that the truth of Heine's warning is exemplified on a broad front. It is a warning that Berlin often referred to, and provides an answer to those who ask, as from time to time they do, why intellectual history matters.
Among the contributions are "My Intellectual Path," Berlin's last essay, a retrospective autobiographical survey of his main preoccupations; and "Jewish Slavery and Emancipation," the classic statement of his Zionist views, long unavailable in print. His other subjects include the Enlightenment, Giambattista Vico, Vissarion Belinsky, Alexander Herzen, G.V. Plekhanov, the Russian intelligentsia, the idea of liberty, political realism, nationalism, and historicism. The book exhibits the full range of his enormously wide expertise and demonstrates the striking and enormously engaging individuality, as well as the power, of his own ideas.
"Over a hundred years ago, the German poet Heine warned the French not to underestimate the power of philosophical concepts nurtured in the stillness of a professor's study could destroy a civilization."--Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty , 1958
The connecting theme of these essays, as in the case of earlier volumes, is the crucial social and political role--past, present and future--of ideas, and of their progenitors. A rich variety of subject-matters is represented--from philosophy to education, from Russia to Israel, from Marxism to romanticism--so that the truth of Heine's warning is exemplified on a broad front. It is a warning that Berlin often referred to, and provides an answer to those who ask, as from time to time they do, why intellectual history matters.
Among the contributions are "My Intellectual Path," Berlin's last essay, a retrospective autobiographical survey of his main preoccupations; and "Jewish Slavery and Emancipation," the classic statement of his Zionist views, long unavailable in print. His other subjects include the Enlightenment, Giambattista Vico, Vissarion Belinsky, Alexander Herzen, G.V. Plekhanov, the Russian intelligentsia, the idea of liberty, political realism, nationalism, and historicism. The book exhibits the full range of his enormously wide expertise and demonstrates the striking and enormously engaging individuality, as well as the power, of his own ideas.
"Over a hundred years ago, the German poet Heine warned the French not to underestimate the power of philosophical concepts nurtured in the stillness of a professor's study could destroy a civilization."--Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty , 1958
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
55 people are currently reading
1178 people want to read
About the author
Isaiah Berlin
201 books780 followersSir Isaiah Berlin was a philosopher and historian of ideas, regarded as one of the leading liberal thinkers of the twentieth century. He excelled as an essayist, lecturer and conversationalist; and as a brilliant speaker who delivered, rapidly and spontaneously, richly allusive and coherently structured material, whether for a lecture series at Oxford University or as a broadcaster on the BBC Third Programme, usually without a script. Many of his essays and lectures were later collected in book form.
Born in Riga, now capital of Latvia, then part of the Russian Empire, he was the first person of Jewish descent to be elected to a prize fellowship at All Souls College, Oxford. From 1957 to 1967, he was Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory at the University of Oxford. He was president of the Aristotelian Society from 1963 to 1964. In 1966, he helped to found Wolfson College, Oxford, and became its first President. He was knighted in 1957, and was awarded the Order of Merit in 1971. He was President of the British Academy from 1974 to 1978. He also received the 1979 Jerusalem Prize for his writings on individual freedom. Berlin's work on liberal theory has had a lasting influence.
Berlin is best known for his essay Two Concepts of Liberty, delivered in 1958 as his inaugural lecture as Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory at Oxford. He defined negative liberty as the absence of constraints on, or interference with, agents' possible action. Greater "negative freedom" meant fewer restrictions on possible action. Berlin associated positive liberty with the idea of self-mastery, or the capacity to determine oneself, to be in control of one's destiny. While Berlin granted that both concepts of liberty represent valid human ideals, as a matter of history the positive concept of liberty has proven particularly susceptible to political abuse.
Berlin contended that under the influence of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant and G. W. F. Hegel (all committed to the positive concept of liberty), European political thinkers often equated liberty with forms of political discipline or constraint. This became politically dangerous when notions of positive liberty were, in the nineteenth century, used to defend nationalism, self-determination and the Communist idea of collective rational control over human destiny. Berlin argued that, following this line of thought, demands for freedom paradoxically become demands for forms of collective control and discipline – those deemed necessary for the "self-mastery" or self-determination of nations, classes, democratic communities, and even humanity as a whole. There is thus an elective affinity, for Berlin, between positive liberty and political totalitarianism.
Conversely, negative liberty represents a different, perhaps safer, understanding of the concept of liberty. Its proponents (such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill) insisted that constraint and discipline were the antithesis of liberty and so were (and are) less prone to confusing liberty and constraint in the manner of the philosophical harbingers of modern totalitarianism. It is this concept of Negative Liberty that Isaiah Berlin supported. It dominated heavily his early chapters in his third lecture.
This negative liberty is central to the claim for toleration due to incommensurability. This concept is mirrored in the work of Joseph Raz.
Berlin's espousal of negative liberty, his hatred of totalitarianism and his experience of Russia in the revolution and through his contact with the poet Anna Akhmatova made him an enemy of the Soviet Union and he was one of the leading public intellectuals in the ideological battle against Communism during the Cold War.
Born in Riga, now capital of Latvia, then part of the Russian Empire, he was the first person of Jewish descent to be elected to a prize fellowship at All Souls College, Oxford. From 1957 to 1967, he was Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory at the University of Oxford. He was president of the Aristotelian Society from 1963 to 1964. In 1966, he helped to found Wolfson College, Oxford, and became its first President. He was knighted in 1957, and was awarded the Order of Merit in 1971. He was President of the British Academy from 1974 to 1978. He also received the 1979 Jerusalem Prize for his writings on individual freedom. Berlin's work on liberal theory has had a lasting influence.
Berlin is best known for his essay Two Concepts of Liberty, delivered in 1958 as his inaugural lecture as Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory at Oxford. He defined negative liberty as the absence of constraints on, or interference with, agents' possible action. Greater "negative freedom" meant fewer restrictions on possible action. Berlin associated positive liberty with the idea of self-mastery, or the capacity to determine oneself, to be in control of one's destiny. While Berlin granted that both concepts of liberty represent valid human ideals, as a matter of history the positive concept of liberty has proven particularly susceptible to political abuse.
Berlin contended that under the influence of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant and G. W. F. Hegel (all committed to the positive concept of liberty), European political thinkers often equated liberty with forms of political discipline or constraint. This became politically dangerous when notions of positive liberty were, in the nineteenth century, used to defend nationalism, self-determination and the Communist idea of collective rational control over human destiny. Berlin argued that, following this line of thought, demands for freedom paradoxically become demands for forms of collective control and discipline – those deemed necessary for the "self-mastery" or self-determination of nations, classes, democratic communities, and even humanity as a whole. There is thus an elective affinity, for Berlin, between positive liberty and political totalitarianism.
Conversely, negative liberty represents a different, perhaps safer, understanding of the concept of liberty. Its proponents (such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill) insisted that constraint and discipline were the antithesis of liberty and so were (and are) less prone to confusing liberty and constraint in the manner of the philosophical harbingers of modern totalitarianism. It is this concept of Negative Liberty that Isaiah Berlin supported. It dominated heavily his early chapters in his third lecture.
This negative liberty is central to the claim for toleration due to incommensurability. This concept is mirrored in the work of Joseph Raz.
Berlin's espousal of negative liberty, his hatred of totalitarianism and his experience of Russia in the revolution and through his contact with the poet Anna Akhmatova made him an enemy of the Soviet Union and he was one of the leading public intellectuals in the ideological battle against Communism during the Cold War.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews
November 5, 2025
خیلی زود باید برای این کتاب مرور بنویسم.
April 8, 2015
کتاب مجموعه ی پراکنده ای از جستارهای آیزایا برلین هست. جستار اول و آخر کتاب خیلی جالب بود. خصوصا جستار آخر که روی یه موضوع غالبا فراموش شده انگشت گذاشته بود: آیا سیاست ورزی جنم می خواد یا یه رشته ی قابل یادگیری هست؟
مخاطب کتاب کسانی هستن که به تاریخ اندیشه در روسیه علاقه مندن
مخاطب کتاب کسانی هستن که به تاریخ اندیشه در روسیه علاقه مندن
July 12, 2019
Reading Isaiah Berlin is the intellectual equivalent of a Finnish sauna: when finished, one feels refreshed, cleansed and bursting with euphoric enthusiasm. Regardless of what subject Berlin chooses, his writings elevate timeless ideas, or contemplation of, to use one of Berlin’s favorite phrases, “concepts and categories”, and always have implications for a myriad of contemporary issues. I have never encountered a clearer thinker or writer of so many and diverse, seemingly complex, topics. As his champion and editor Henry Hardy observes in his preface, Berlin “was constitutionally incapable of writing with the opacity of a specialist.”
The Power of Ideas may be the best starting point for those new to Berlin’s writing. Each essay, relatively short and concise by Berlin’s standards, offers a lucid gem from which the reader can easily find other works to delve deeper into specific topics. The last essay Berlin wrote in his life, "My Intellectual Path," prepared for a Chinese text about American and British philosophers, begins the book and is a valedictory summation of his most lasting contributions to the history of ideas, the field he created. Ideas, to be overly trite, have consequences. Berlin’s contributions delve into the sources of those ideas, which are usually very obscure in hindsight, and how they shaped or were perverted by subsequent history.
Throughout his life, Berlin warned against monism—the notion that one fundamental, mechanistic, or scientific “truth” could be applied to explain and predict social and political experience. He is most often identified as the champion of pluralism, which is very distinct from cultural relativism, the polar opposite of monism. Pluralism demands respect of cultures, general agreement of objective facts, and respect for differing values. As Berlin writes, “My political pluralism is a product of reading Vico and Herder, and of understanding the roots of romanticism, which in its violent, pathological form went too far for human toleration.” In this volume, one also gets a sense of how thinkers like Belinsky, Herzen, Meinecke, and Weizmann all contributed to his intellectual outlook.
In the final essay of this volume, “General Education,” written in 1969, Berlin sums up the value of power of ideas, “But if men are to be enabled to control their lives in the light of knowledge of what it is that they are dealing with, and not simply to regard disturbing changes of this kind with mere bewilderment, or fatalistic resignation, or fanaticism, or the disdain of the elect, or a self-destructive desire to surrender to the irresistible, it is desirable that the young, in particular, should be furnished with weapons against such helplessness.” Berlin’s ideas are as relevant today as they were when he wrote this and will continue to be for generations to come. Ideas never die. Especially good ones.
The Power of Ideas may be the best starting point for those new to Berlin’s writing. Each essay, relatively short and concise by Berlin’s standards, offers a lucid gem from which the reader can easily find other works to delve deeper into specific topics. The last essay Berlin wrote in his life, "My Intellectual Path," prepared for a Chinese text about American and British philosophers, begins the book and is a valedictory summation of his most lasting contributions to the history of ideas, the field he created. Ideas, to be overly trite, have consequences. Berlin’s contributions delve into the sources of those ideas, which are usually very obscure in hindsight, and how they shaped or were perverted by subsequent history.
Throughout his life, Berlin warned against monism—the notion that one fundamental, mechanistic, or scientific “truth” could be applied to explain and predict social and political experience. He is most often identified as the champion of pluralism, which is very distinct from cultural relativism, the polar opposite of monism. Pluralism demands respect of cultures, general agreement of objective facts, and respect for differing values. As Berlin writes, “My political pluralism is a product of reading Vico and Herder, and of understanding the roots of romanticism, which in its violent, pathological form went too far for human toleration.” In this volume, one also gets a sense of how thinkers like Belinsky, Herzen, Meinecke, and Weizmann all contributed to his intellectual outlook.
In the final essay of this volume, “General Education,” written in 1969, Berlin sums up the value of power of ideas, “But if men are to be enabled to control their lives in the light of knowledge of what it is that they are dealing with, and not simply to regard disturbing changes of this kind with mere bewilderment, or fatalistic resignation, or fanaticism, or the disdain of the elect, or a self-destructive desire to surrender to the irresistible, it is desirable that the young, in particular, should be furnished with weapons against such helplessness.” Berlin’s ideas are as relevant today as they were when he wrote this and will continue to be for generations to come. Ideas never die. Especially good ones.
December 18, 2018
آیزایا برلین به معنای حقیقی کلمهی آموزگار اندیشهها ست. او در این مجموعهجستار ما را با انقلابیهای قرن نوزدهم روسیه یعنی هرتسن، بلینسکی، و پدر مارکسیسم روسی، پلخانف، آشنا میکند؛ از فلسفه و اهدافش میگوید و باز سرکی به روشنگری و رمانتیسیسم میکشد. آراء فرهنگی ویکو و فلسفهی مارکس را میشکافد و نهایتاً واقعبینی و قضاوت صحیح در سیاست را تحلیل میکند. تحلیل آزادی نیز، چون باقی آثار استاد، در کتاب حضور دارد. ترجمه هم -گفتن ندارد- بینقص و بیخلل است
May 15, 2013
If you believe that ideas are important and that the Enlightenment philosophers fell short of what is really going on in our world, then Berlin is for you. Although he believes in reason as a measure of most things, he spends these lectures in debunking the idealistic purity of Marxist and Materialist thought. He closes the book with an analysis of getting things done in countries that all critics of Obama should read. He notes chillingly that FDR and Stalin achieved their aims in governing while Lenin did not. His look at Israel at the beginning of its formation is heart-wrenching for its datedness. I so wish that it was still a land of ideals.
April 1, 2009
Sir Isaiah Berlin, OM (6 June 1909 – 5 November 1997) was a philosopher and historian of ideas, regarded as one of the leading liberal thinkers of the twentieth century. He excelled as an essayist, lecturer and conversationalist; and as a brilliant speaker who delivered, rapidly and spontaneously, richly allusive and coherently structured material, whether for a lecture series at Oxford University or as a broadcaster on the BBC Third Program, usually without a script. Many of his essays and lectures were later collected in book form.
In 2000 Henry Hardy edited a collection of his shorter essays titled The Power of Ideas from the following quotation:
Over a hundred years ago, the German poet Heine warned the French not to underestimate the power of ideas: philosophical concepts nurtured in the stillness of a professor's study could destroy a civilisation. (Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty, 1958)
This collection demonstrates both the power and the breadth of Berlin's thought with essays covering topics in the nature and history of philosophy, Russian intellectual history, political philosophy, Zionism, and the history of ideas. Power indeed to both analyze and understand human thought and history. Berlin shares his admiration for the enlightenment while analyzing the meaning of those ideas. It is a book that will lead you to other books, both by Sir Isaiah himself and others. It may spur an interest in the literature of nineteenth century Russia, or encourage you to read Karl Marx's Das Kapital to find out why John Maynard Keynes did not like it. Berlin's writing style is elegant and always readable, even when the most difficult ideas are being discussed. Most of all the essays included in this collection demonstrate the strength of classical liberal thought and the fundamental humaneness of the mind of Sir Isaiah Berlin. I came to this collection with an appreciation for Berlin's thought that was only confirmed and augmented by my reading of this book.
In 2000 Henry Hardy edited a collection of his shorter essays titled The Power of Ideas from the following quotation:
Over a hundred years ago, the German poet Heine warned the French not to underestimate the power of ideas: philosophical concepts nurtured in the stillness of a professor's study could destroy a civilisation. (Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty, 1958)
This collection demonstrates both the power and the breadth of Berlin's thought with essays covering topics in the nature and history of philosophy, Russian intellectual history, political philosophy, Zionism, and the history of ideas. Power indeed to both analyze and understand human thought and history. Berlin shares his admiration for the enlightenment while analyzing the meaning of those ideas. It is a book that will lead you to other books, both by Sir Isaiah himself and others. It may spur an interest in the literature of nineteenth century Russia, or encourage you to read Karl Marx's Das Kapital to find out why John Maynard Keynes did not like it. Berlin's writing style is elegant and always readable, even when the most difficult ideas are being discussed. Most of all the essays included in this collection demonstrate the strength of classical liberal thought and the fundamental humaneness of the mind of Sir Isaiah Berlin. I came to this collection with an appreciation for Berlin's thought that was only confirmed and augmented by my reading of this book.
July 8, 2018
Berlin mentions 18th century Italian philosopher, Giambattista Vico and the German, Johann Gottfried Herder, as two of his biggest influences. He discusses the likes of pluralism and monism, stating that “Monism is at the root of every extremism.” We also get a short introduction into the work and importance of better known thinkers and philosophers, the likes of Marx, Plekhanov and Belinsky.
He has some interesting ideas in here, particularly on freedom and independence, but I found the style too dry and long winded for my tastes. At one point when talking of another philosopher he admires, he says, “The reader tends to be buffeted, bewildered and exhausted; no idea is properly presented or developed or organised into a coherent structure. It is a very punishing style.” Which made me laugh as this is how I felt about him during a lot of this.
There are no shortage of books out there with philosophers publishing work about other philosophers, and without doubt many of those make for great reading, but surely original thought has to take precedence, and to be honest I am not sure that I saw so much of that in here. I don’t think much of this has aged well at all, lectures and writings, some of these from the 40s, 50s and 60s really fall flat and come across as dusty and tedious. There were too many dry and sluggish moments in here where he appears to use a lot of words in order to say very little of substance and overall I wasn’t particularly impressed by this.
March 27, 2021
这一本可以说是伯林所关注与研究的主要对象的导览手册，文章都不长，里面的大部分主题都可以从他的其他书中找到更为深入的阐述。不过关于伯林犹太复国主义者身份的问题，倒是在这本书里得到了比较满意的解答，感到一丝欣喜。对于那些对伯林不是很感冒的读者来说，也仍然有两篇值得一读，《寻找社会地位》与《论民族主义》，或许能够从中发现一些看待问题的其他角度。我最喜欢的是伯林对马克思主义研究的辩护态度，作为一个对马克思主义抱持诸多质疑的学者，他认为即使要驳斥马克思主义，也首先应当允许人们理解它。这一态度同样体现在伯林对任何其他问题的观点上，比如民族主义。他在1964年发表于伊顿学院《远见》杂志上的那篇《论民族主义》一文中是这样写的：“如果人类活得足够长，也许能够看到连民族主义也显得荒谬和缥缈的那一天。但如果这一天真的会到来，我们应该去理解民族主义而非轻视它；因为凡是不被理解的，都难以控制：是民族主义主宰着人类，而非人类主宰着民族主义。我们的任务是弄清楚这种无比强大却并非生来异常的现象源自哪里，它又如何变得病态失控，并为其寻找自我抒发的有效途径；既不要给它贴上无可容忍的非理性标签（它既不是理性的，也不是非理性的，而是有着潜在的创造力），也不要利用它达成我们自己的目的或者沉湎其中。”
September 5, 2021
The Power of Ideas isn't a single volume in itself, rather a collection of essays by Berlin himself, who rarely wrote at length.
The essays contain some interesting insights, particularly the chapter on Mikhail Plenakhov, however, Berlin can be difficult to follow, as he writes in an extremely wordy manner, always using a paragraph when a sentence would suffice.
An interesting read in itself, but not easy to digest, and needs considerable unpacking to absorb the main points.
The essays contain some interesting insights, particularly the chapter on Mikhail Plenakhov, however, Berlin can be difficult to follow, as he writes in an extremely wordy manner, always using a paragraph when a sentence would suffice.
An interesting read in itself, but not easy to digest, and needs considerable unpacking to absorb the main points.
June 17, 2024
صد صفحه اول کتاب و بخش های آخر رو خوندم . اولش جذابیت داشت اما کم کم توی بخش های نظرات فیلسوفان مختلف نتونستم پیش برم . ولی از بخش آخر خوشم اومد
برلین میگوید چیزی به نام شم تصمیم گیری است که اگر دانش سیاسی از آن بی بهره باشد، چیزی جز تباهی ندارد. نمیگوید نخوانید بلکه میگوید حتما بخوانید اما اگر شهود علوم انسانی ندارید، تصمیم ساز این حوزه نشوید.
برلین میگوید چیزی به نام شم تصمیم گیری است که اگر دانش سیاسی از آن بی بهره باشد، چیزی جز تباهی ندارد. نمیگوید نخوانید بلکه میگوید حتما بخوانید اما اگر شهود علوم انسانی ندارید، تصمیم ساز این حوزه نشوید.
March 1, 2019
I picked up The Power of Ideas after Isaiah Berlin kept popping up in the cited sources of A Secular Age by Charles Taylor. It turns out it's no coincidence that Taylor cites him so much; checking Taylor's Wiki page, his doctoral advisor was Isaiah Berlin! I've encountered the name before, so I made sure to add him to my list of people I should probably know.
Taylor cites Berlin to support his argument of plurality of ideas, not only within society, but even within a single person-- counter to some Enlightenment ideas of uniformity:
Modernity has invested deeply in the myth of the single, omnipotent code. But there are theorists, such as Benjamin Constant, Alexis de Tocqueville, and in our century, Isaiah Berlin, who have recognized that we have to given our allegiance to more than one principle, and that those we essentially hold to are frequently in conflict.
He also cites Berlin as an example of a moral philosophy of self-authorization, the idea that your goals can be self-determined, rather than invoking God or some super-natural deity to direct your life:
Berlin invokes "the ideal of freedom to choose ends without claiming eternal validity for them". He acknowledges that this was not recognized in the past, and may not be in the future, "but no sceptical conclusions seem to me to follow".
Berlin dealt in the currency of ideas. As a historian of ideas, he tries to flesh out how they arise, how they impact history, and how they change over time. You learn throughout the pages of his book that there is a sharp divide among philosophers about how ideas operate in history. Berlin takes the side that ideas have power, and that they have causative effects. Ideas come first. On the other side is Marx and other determinists, who believe that ideas are shaped by the environment, by economic conditions, by necessity. Ideas are post-hoc justifications by people in power to justify their power over others. It removes the idea that truth can really be attained, because philosophy itself is just a series of power plays.
The collection is pretty eclectic: some give you a broad swath of ideas, including a history of the Enlightenment and a history of Romanticism. Others are very specific, for instance, his sketch of Giambattista Vico, an Italian philosopher whom Berlin credits with the invention of the history of thought:
What was his discovery? The heart of it is this: that men were able to understand their own history in a fashion different from and, in Vico's view, superior to that in which they understood the works of nature; and, as a corollary of this, that to understand something, and not merely to be able to describe it, or analyze it into component parts, was to understand how it came into being-- its genesis, its growth-- and that its essence consists in coming to be what it is; in short, that true understanding is always genetic, and, in the case of men and their works, always historical, not timeless, and not analytic.
It sounds like he was a bit of a hero for Berlin, even if he isn't well-known today. You get into some niche areas as well, including the personalities behind Russian Communism (it's actually not Lenin; he credits Plekhanov as the father of Russian Marxism) and some insights into the founding of the state of Israel.
I'll just give a few of my favorite ideas, since it's hard to focus on any one topic. I really liked his insights into Romanticism. I have studied Romanticism before, and I consider myself a bit of a Romantic myself, in the pattern of C. S. Lewis and his idea of Sehnsucht which he describes in The Pilgrim's Regress:
The experience is one of intense longing. It is distinguished from other longings by two things. In the first place, though the sense of want is acute and even painful, yet the mere wanting is felt to be somehow a delight. Other desires are felt as pleasures only if satisfaction is expected in the near future: hunger is pleasant only while we know (or believe) that we are soon going to eat. But this desire, even when there is no hope of possible satisfaction, continues to be prized, and even to be preferred to anything else in the world, by those who have once felt it...In the second place, there is a peculiar mystery about the object of this Desire. Inexperienced people (and inattention leaves some inexperienced all their lives) suppose, when they feel it, that they know what they are desiring. Thus if it comes to a child while he is looking at a far off hillside he at once thinks ‘if only I were there’; if it comes when he is remembering some event in the past, he thinks ‘if only I could go back to those days’.
Berlin seems to uncover some ambiguity in Romanticism:
[Romanticism came with a] new emphasis on the subjective and ideal rather than the objective and the real, on the process of creation rather than its effects, on motives rather than consequences; and, as a necessary corollary of this, on the quality of the vision, the state of mind or soul of the acting agent-- purity of heart, innocence of intention, sincerity of purpose rather than getting the answer right, that is accurate correspondence to the 'given.'... the celebration of all forms of defiance directed against the 'given'-- the impersonal, the 'brute fact' in morals or in politics-- or against the static and the accepted, and the value placed on minorities and martyrs as such, no matter what the ideal for which they suffer
To me, this sounded like our current state of affairs in politics is a rather Romantic mood. You could easily pick a set of these as defining social justice warriors or the new wave socialists out in politics (I couldn't help but think of AOC's statement that I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right and I can imagine Ben Shapiro shooting back Facts don't care about your feelings.) I think we should be concerned when sincerity of purpose is considered of more value or weight than facts. You can get into a lot of trouble when leaders are making decisions in total ignorance of the facts, or choosing to ignore facts. Of course, there's the opposite extreme where you have all facts but no moral compass. Either way, both have led to historical atrocities. Pick your poison. We need balance.
He has another interesting piece The Search for Status that argues that when many marginalized groups are fighting for "liberty" they are actually fighting for "status." He argues that throwing the word "liberty" around willy nilly is irresponsible, and we should be careful including all sorts of ideas under it. Here's the opening line:
We often speak of demands for liberty made by oppressed classes or nationalities. But it is not always individual freedom, nor even individual equity, that they primarily want. What they aspire to is not simply unhampered liberty of action for their members, nor, above everything else, equality of social or economic opportunity, still less assignment of a secure and carefully determined place in a frictionless, organic, 'monolithic' State devised by the rational lawgiver. What they want, as often as not, is simply recognition-- of their class or nation, or colour or race-- as an independent source of human activity, as an entity with a will of its own, intending to act in accordance with it (whether it is good, or legitimate, or not), and not to be ruled, educated, guided, with however light a hand, as being not quite fully human, and therefore not quite fully free.
Interesting argument, and I do think that traditional definitions of freedom are as valued today. It reminded me of Jonathan Haidt's (and Thomas Sowell's) discussion of the different between procedural justice and distributive justice in The Coddling of the American Mind, though they don't totally align. While Twitter and Facebook didn't exist in Isaiah Berlin's day, this essay seemed eerily appropriate in an era of virtue signalling.
A great series of essays. Isaiah Berlin was a great mind. He's fairly accessible for an academic. Like his graduate student Charles Taylor, Berlin is very nuanced in his approach: he doesn't dismiss counter-arguments, but rather seeks to engage them. He pulls out a variety of topics that you may not have thought before. I left feeling bad that I don't know Russian, because I would love to read everything by the 19th century Russian intelligentsia.
Taylor cites Berlin to support his argument of plurality of ideas, not only within society, but even within a single person-- counter to some Enlightenment ideas of uniformity:
Modernity has invested deeply in the myth of the single, omnipotent code. But there are theorists, such as Benjamin Constant, Alexis de Tocqueville, and in our century, Isaiah Berlin, who have recognized that we have to given our allegiance to more than one principle, and that those we essentially hold to are frequently in conflict.
He also cites Berlin as an example of a moral philosophy of self-authorization, the idea that your goals can be self-determined, rather than invoking God or some super-natural deity to direct your life:
Berlin invokes "the ideal of freedom to choose ends without claiming eternal validity for them". He acknowledges that this was not recognized in the past, and may not be in the future, "but no sceptical conclusions seem to me to follow".
Berlin dealt in the currency of ideas. As a historian of ideas, he tries to flesh out how they arise, how they impact history, and how they change over time. You learn throughout the pages of his book that there is a sharp divide among philosophers about how ideas operate in history. Berlin takes the side that ideas have power, and that they have causative effects. Ideas come first. On the other side is Marx and other determinists, who believe that ideas are shaped by the environment, by economic conditions, by necessity. Ideas are post-hoc justifications by people in power to justify their power over others. It removes the idea that truth can really be attained, because philosophy itself is just a series of power plays.
The collection is pretty eclectic: some give you a broad swath of ideas, including a history of the Enlightenment and a history of Romanticism. Others are very specific, for instance, his sketch of Giambattista Vico, an Italian philosopher whom Berlin credits with the invention of the history of thought:
What was his discovery? The heart of it is this: that men were able to understand their own history in a fashion different from and, in Vico's view, superior to that in which they understood the works of nature; and, as a corollary of this, that to understand something, and not merely to be able to describe it, or analyze it into component parts, was to understand how it came into being-- its genesis, its growth-- and that its essence consists in coming to be what it is; in short, that true understanding is always genetic, and, in the case of men and their works, always historical, not timeless, and not analytic.
It sounds like he was a bit of a hero for Berlin, even if he isn't well-known today. You get into some niche areas as well, including the personalities behind Russian Communism (it's actually not Lenin; he credits Plekhanov as the father of Russian Marxism) and some insights into the founding of the state of Israel.
I'll just give a few of my favorite ideas, since it's hard to focus on any one topic. I really liked his insights into Romanticism. I have studied Romanticism before, and I consider myself a bit of a Romantic myself, in the pattern of C. S. Lewis and his idea of Sehnsucht which he describes in The Pilgrim's Regress:
The experience is one of intense longing. It is distinguished from other longings by two things. In the first place, though the sense of want is acute and even painful, yet the mere wanting is felt to be somehow a delight. Other desires are felt as pleasures only if satisfaction is expected in the near future: hunger is pleasant only while we know (or believe) that we are soon going to eat. But this desire, even when there is no hope of possible satisfaction, continues to be prized, and even to be preferred to anything else in the world, by those who have once felt it...In the second place, there is a peculiar mystery about the object of this Desire. Inexperienced people (and inattention leaves some inexperienced all their lives) suppose, when they feel it, that they know what they are desiring. Thus if it comes to a child while he is looking at a far off hillside he at once thinks ‘if only I were there’; if it comes when he is remembering some event in the past, he thinks ‘if only I could go back to those days’.
Berlin seems to uncover some ambiguity in Romanticism:
[Romanticism came with a] new emphasis on the subjective and ideal rather than the objective and the real, on the process of creation rather than its effects, on motives rather than consequences; and, as a necessary corollary of this, on the quality of the vision, the state of mind or soul of the acting agent-- purity of heart, innocence of intention, sincerity of purpose rather than getting the answer right, that is accurate correspondence to the 'given.'... the celebration of all forms of defiance directed against the 'given'-- the impersonal, the 'brute fact' in morals or in politics-- or against the static and the accepted, and the value placed on minorities and martyrs as such, no matter what the ideal for which they suffer
To me, this sounded like our current state of affairs in politics is a rather Romantic mood. You could easily pick a set of these as defining social justice warriors or the new wave socialists out in politics (I couldn't help but think of AOC's statement that I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right and I can imagine Ben Shapiro shooting back Facts don't care about your feelings.) I think we should be concerned when sincerity of purpose is considered of more value or weight than facts. You can get into a lot of trouble when leaders are making decisions in total ignorance of the facts, or choosing to ignore facts. Of course, there's the opposite extreme where you have all facts but no moral compass. Either way, both have led to historical atrocities. Pick your poison. We need balance.
He has another interesting piece The Search for Status that argues that when many marginalized groups are fighting for "liberty" they are actually fighting for "status." He argues that throwing the word "liberty" around willy nilly is irresponsible, and we should be careful including all sorts of ideas under it. Here's the opening line:
We often speak of demands for liberty made by oppressed classes or nationalities. But it is not always individual freedom, nor even individual equity, that they primarily want. What they aspire to is not simply unhampered liberty of action for their members, nor, above everything else, equality of social or economic opportunity, still less assignment of a secure and carefully determined place in a frictionless, organic, 'monolithic' State devised by the rational lawgiver. What they want, as often as not, is simply recognition-- of their class or nation, or colour or race-- as an independent source of human activity, as an entity with a will of its own, intending to act in accordance with it (whether it is good, or legitimate, or not), and not to be ruled, educated, guided, with however light a hand, as being not quite fully human, and therefore not quite fully free.
Interesting argument, and I do think that traditional definitions of freedom are as valued today. It reminded me of Jonathan Haidt's (and Thomas Sowell's) discussion of the different between procedural justice and distributive justice in The Coddling of the American Mind, though they don't totally align. While Twitter and Facebook didn't exist in Isaiah Berlin's day, this essay seemed eerily appropriate in an era of virtue signalling.
A great series of essays. Isaiah Berlin was a great mind. He's fairly accessible for an academic. Like his graduate student Charles Taylor, Berlin is very nuanced in his approach: he doesn't dismiss counter-arguments, but rather seeks to engage them. He pulls out a variety of topics that you may not have thought before. I left feeling bad that I don't know Russian, because I would love to read everything by the 19th century Russian intelligentsia.
January 24, 2014
اگر مارکسیسم درست باشد، اندیشه های ما مشروط و مقید به جایگاه ما در ساختار اجتماعی و اقتصادی خواهند بود. مارکسیسم می گوید تاریخ دارای مسیر و قوانینی است که می توان کشف کرد، و فقط کسانی که از نظر تاریخی در پیکار طبقاتی جانب حریف پیروزمند را بگیرند دارای اعتقاداتی شایسته ی توجه و ملاحظه اند و احتمال دارد در دست و پنجه نرم کردن با واقعیت کامیاب شوند.طرف مقابل محکوم به نابودی و عاجز از رویارویی با مساله است و می کوشد افکار خود را با عذرتراشی به صورت اخلاقی و سیاسی جلوه دهد. در این پیکار جهانی، شکست خوردگان - خواه طبقه ی بورژوا در جامعه و خواه دولت ها اعم از دموکراتیک یا سلطنتی- شایان اعتنا نیستند.
به موجب این نظریه، مارکسیست ها توان فوق العاده پیدا می کنند، زیرا می توانند نگرش ها و مواضع مخالفانشان را نادیده بگیرند؛ مخالفانی که تاریخ محکومشان کرده است و افکارشان احتمال ندارد برای خواستاران بقا سودی داشته باشد. با این اعتقاد نه تنها استفاده از هر حربه ای، از سانسور تا کشتن، بر ضد مخالفان توجیه می شود، بلکه پایه ی مفهوم دموکراسی بر می افتد، زیرا پیش فرض دموکراسی این است که افراد به صرف تعلق به طبقه ای غیر از طبقه ی شما، بی ارزش و نجات ناپذیر نمی شوند.
آیزایا برلین / دموکراسی، کمونیسم و فرد
به موجب این نظریه، مارکسیست ها توان فوق العاده پیدا می کنند، زیرا می توانند نگرش ها و مواضع مخالفانشان را نادیده بگیرند؛ مخالفانی که تاریخ محکومشان کرده است و افکارشان احتمال ندارد برای خواستاران بقا سودی داشته باشد. با این اعتقاد نه تنها استفاده از هر حربه ای، از سانسور تا کشتن، بر ضد مخالفان توجیه می شود، بلکه پایه ی مفهوم دموکراسی بر می افتد، زیرا پیش فرض دموکراسی این است که افراد به صرف تعلق به طبقه ای غیر از طبقه ی شما، بی ارزش و نجات ناپذیر نمی شوند.
آیزایا برلین / دموکراسی، کمونیسم و فرد
January 19, 2011
A fascinating book. Easy to read, but also rich and relevant in the subjects proposed.
Isaiah Berlin exposes many of his ideas, about exactly, ideas. The book is a good travel throughout the history and implications of the ideas and ideologies along several historical periods and places.
The most important, and pleasant, is that this exposition of the intellectual history is conducted under the light of the freedom and individual rights. A well established criticism against abstractions, radicalism and human sacrifices in the altar of the ideologies is presented across the articles.
This is definitely a book to be read by the followers of the freedom and wisdom.
Isaiah Berlin exposes many of his ideas, about exactly, ideas. The book is a good travel throughout the history and implications of the ideas and ideologies along several historical periods and places.
The most important, and pleasant, is that this exposition of the intellectual history is conducted under the light of the freedom and individual rights. A well established criticism against abstractions, radicalism and human sacrifices in the altar of the ideologies is presented across the articles.
This is definitely a book to be read by the followers of the freedom and wisdom.
July 19, 2010
A collection of short essays by the philosopher Isaiah Berlin. I found some to be intriguing, others to be confusing, and then some were tedious. Definitely worth looking at if you have an interest in western philosophy/psychology.
June 19, 2014
A good collection of some of Berlin's essays on great thinkers, nationalism and his own intellectual formation.
August 12, 2023
با یکی از دوستانم روی چمن های پارک نشسته بودیم و علی القاعده مشغول شخم زدن زمین. داشت درباره کارش صحبت میکرد. میگفت حقوق وزارت کار به او میدهند و کفاف نیازهای خودش را هم نمیدهد اما برای تجربه اش میخواهد.
من هم گفتم که از این جور کارها برای من ریخته بود اما مرزی برای خودم گذاشتم که اگر از ساعتی فلان قدر کمتر باشد نمیروم و نرفتم.
او خندید و گفت برای همین است که بیکار است.
ای بابا! اگر مارکس خوانده بودی،
الان به جای اینکه به من بخندی به حال خودت گریه میکردی.
مارکس میگفت پولدارها کسانی هستند که ابزار تولید در دستشان است و چون ابزار تولید در دستشان است پولدارتر هم میشوند. ابزار تولید فقط چهار تا پیچ و مهره نیست که به هم وصل شده. انسان ها هم ابزار تولید هستند. زمانی که برای کسی کار میکنی و او کمتر از سودی که از تو میبرد به تو پول میدهد در حال ضعیف کردن تو و قوی تر کردن خودش است.
اما داستان به همین جا ختم نمیشود. ما فکر میکنیم جامعه طبقاتی برای زمان ساسانیان است در حالی که الان هم خارج شدن از طبقه ای به طبقه دیگر تقریبا محال است. فقیرها فقیرتر میشوند و پولدارها پولدارتر. صعود یا نزول از طبقه ها به ندرت اتفاق می افتد به خاطر همین که فقیر کارش را ارزان میفروشد.
<او مسئول استضعاف تمام طبقه اجتماعی خویش است. میتوانست کسب وکاری راه بیاندازد. چند نفر هم سطح خود را با درامد منصفانه استخدام کند و شکاف طبقاتی را کم کند اما تفکر «کار نکنم، نان خوردن ندارم» باعث میشود دنده عقب برود و شتاب رئیسش رو به جلو بیشتر شود.>
برلین میگفت طبقات ضعیف به دنبال افزایش موقعیت اجتماعی ��ا اصطلاحا «به حساب آمدن» و تاثیرگذاری هستند و بقیه کارهایشان برای آن است اما من فکر میکنم باید به دنبال این باشند اما نیستند بلکه به دنبال رفاه حداقلی خودشان هستند.
آنقدری فلسفه خوانده ام که از فلسفه گفتن یک نفر بفهمم که فیلسوف هست یا نه. برلینِ قدرت اندیشه را فیلسوف نمیدانم. بلکه از فلسفه گزارشی ارائه کرده اما کتاب هرچه جلوتر میرود و برلین نظراتش در حوزه سیاست را میگوید بحث عالمانه تر است. برلین در سیاست حرف دارد چون فلسفه خوانده اما در فلسفه حرفی ندارد.
او به ترک تازی های مدعیان علم طبیعی میتازد. شما فکر میکنید سیاست و علوم انسانی مثل مهندسی و پزشکی است که سواد کافی تضمین گر موفقیت شما باشد؟ برلین میگوید چیزی به نام شم تصمیم گیری است که اگر دانش سیاسی از آن بی بهره باشد، چیزی جز تباهی ندارد. نمیگوید نخوانید بلکه میگوید حتما بخوانید اما اگر شهود علوم انسانی ندارید، تصمیم ساز این حوزه نشوید.
من هم گفتم که از این جور کارها برای من ریخته بود اما مرزی برای خودم گذاشتم که اگر از ساعتی فلان قدر کمتر باشد نمیروم و نرفتم.
او خندید و گفت برای همین است که بیکار است.
ای بابا! اگر مارکس خوانده بودی،
الان به جای اینکه به من بخندی به حال خودت گریه میکردی.
مارکس میگفت پولدارها کسانی هستند که ابزار تولید در دستشان است و چون ابزار تولید در دستشان است پولدارتر هم میشوند. ابزار تولید فقط چهار تا پیچ و مهره نیست که به هم وصل شده. انسان ها هم ابزار تولید هستند. زمانی که برای کسی کار میکنی و او کمتر از سودی که از تو میبرد به تو پول میدهد در حال ضعیف کردن تو و قوی تر کردن خودش است.
اما داستان به همین جا ختم نمیشود. ما فکر میکنیم جامعه طبقاتی برای زمان ساسانیان است در حالی که الان هم خارج شدن از طبقه ای به طبقه دیگر تقریبا محال است. فقیرها فقیرتر میشوند و پولدارها پولدارتر. صعود یا نزول از طبقه ها به ندرت اتفاق می افتد به خاطر همین که فقیر کارش را ارزان میفروشد.
<او مسئول استضعاف تمام طبقه اجتماعی خویش است. میتوانست کسب وکاری راه بیاندازد. چند نفر هم سطح خود را با درامد منصفانه استخدام کند و شکاف طبقاتی را کم کند اما تفکر «کار نکنم، نان خوردن ندارم» باعث میشود دنده عقب برود و شتاب رئیسش رو به جلو بیشتر شود.>
برلین میگفت طبقات ضعیف به دنبال افزایش موقعیت اجتماعی ��ا اصطلاحا «به حساب آمدن» و تاثیرگذاری هستند و بقیه کارهایشان برای آن است اما من فکر میکنم باید به دنبال این باشند اما نیستند بلکه به دنبال رفاه حداقلی خودشان هستند.
آنقدری فلسفه خوانده ام که از فلسفه گفتن یک نفر بفهمم که فیلسوف هست یا نه. برلینِ قدرت اندیشه را فیلسوف نمیدانم. بلکه از فلسفه گزارشی ارائه کرده اما کتاب هرچه جلوتر میرود و برلین نظراتش در حوزه سیاست را میگوید بحث عالمانه تر است. برلین در سیاست حرف دارد چون فلسفه خوانده اما در فلسفه حرفی ندارد.
او به ترک تازی های مدعیان علم طبیعی میتازد. شما فکر میکنید سیاست و علوم انسانی مثل مهندسی و پزشکی است که سواد کافی تضمین گر موفقیت شما باشد؟ برلین میگوید چیزی به نام شم تصمیم گیری است که اگر دانش سیاسی از آن بی بهره باشد، چیزی جز تباهی ندارد. نمیگوید نخوانید بلکه میگوید حتما بخوانید اما اگر شهود علوم انسانی ندارید، تصمیم ساز این حوزه نشوید.
April 24, 2022
‹‹Há mais de cem anos, o poeta alemão Heine alertou os franceses para não subestimarem a força das ideias: os conceitos nutridos na quietude do escritório de um professor poderiam destruir uma civilização.›› Isaiah Berlin tinha plena consciência dessa força e suas análises do ‹‹papel social e político crucial — passado, presente e futuro — das ideias e de seus progenitores›› são precisas e muito relevantes para quem busca um pensamento livre de amarras ideológicas.
Conheci o autor por indicação do querido professor Rodrigo Gurgel e não me decepcionei com a leitura. De origem russa, captou e sintetizou a essência das ideias deste povo. Judeu, refletiu sobre o sofrimento dos judeus ao longo da história e sobre a origem de Israel como nação. Por fim, europeu, examinou várias correntes de pensamento, mas principalmente, o iluminismo e o romantismo. O seu pensamento é cético, mas sem o sarcasmo dos incrédulos ou a paralisia dos que tudo negam. Defendia a pluralidade das ideias, mas não era relativista.
O livro "A força das ideias" é uma reunião de textos curtos e introdutórios, organizada por Henry Hardy. Ao todo são vinte textos, dentre uma autobiografia, perfis biográficos — Giambattista Vico, Belinski, Herzen, Plekhanov, Chaim Weizmann, ensaios sobre a finalidade da filosofia, a filosofia em Marx, o historicismo em Meinecke, o Iluminismo, a história intelectual russa, o papel da ‹‹intelligentsia››, a liberdade, o realismo na política, as origens de Israel, a escravidão e emancipação judaica, a busca de status, a essência do romantismo europeu e a educação geral.
Sir Isaiah Berlin nasceu em 1909, na atual Letônia, que à época fazia parte do Império Russo. No início da década de 20 mudou-se com a família para a Inglaterra, naturalizando-se cidadão britânico. Filósofo, foi professor de teoria social e política em Oxford. Faleceu em 1997. "A força das ideias" está esgotado e atualmente só é possível encontrar em sebos.
https://medium.com/@danielberca
Conheci o autor por indicação do querido professor Rodrigo Gurgel e não me decepcionei com a leitura. De origem russa, captou e sintetizou a essência das ideias deste povo. Judeu, refletiu sobre o sofrimento dos judeus ao longo da história e sobre a origem de Israel como nação. Por fim, europeu, examinou várias correntes de pensamento, mas principalmente, o iluminismo e o romantismo. O seu pensamento é cético, mas sem o sarcasmo dos incrédulos ou a paralisia dos que tudo negam. Defendia a pluralidade das ideias, mas não era relativista.
O livro "A força das ideias" é uma reunião de textos curtos e introdutórios, organizada por Henry Hardy. Ao todo são vinte textos, dentre uma autobiografia, perfis biográficos — Giambattista Vico, Belinski, Herzen, Plekhanov, Chaim Weizmann, ensaios sobre a finalidade da filosofia, a filosofia em Marx, o historicismo em Meinecke, o Iluminismo, a história intelectual russa, o papel da ‹‹intelligentsia››, a liberdade, o realismo na política, as origens de Israel, a escravidão e emancipação judaica, a busca de status, a essência do romantismo europeu e a educação geral.
Sir Isaiah Berlin nasceu em 1909, na atual Letônia, que à época fazia parte do Império Russo. No início da década de 20 mudou-se com a família para a Inglaterra, naturalizando-se cidadão britânico. Filósofo, foi professor de teoria social e política em Oxford. Faleceu em 1997. "A força das ideias" está esgotado e atualmente só é possível encontrar em sebos.
https://medium.com/@danielberca
February 19, 2022
Interesul meu faţă de problemele filozofice a început când eram student la Oxford, la sfârşitul anilor ’20 şi începutul anilor ’30, deoarece filozofia era o parte a cursului pe care îl urmau în acea vreme foarte mulţi studenţi de la Oxford. Ca urmare a interesului persistent pe care l-am arătat faţă de acest domeniu, în 1932 am fost numit profesor de filozofie, şi vederile mele din acea vreme erau, fireşte, influenţate de genul de discuţii pe care filozofii contemporani cu mine le purtau la Oxford. Existau multe alte probleme filozofice, dar s-a întâmplat ca subiectele pe care ne concentram, colegii mei şi cu mine, să fie roadele unei reveniri la empirism care începuse să domine filozofia britanică înainte de Primul Război Mondial, în principal sub influenţa a doi celebri filozofi de la Cambridge, G.E. Moore şi Bertrand Russell.
May 19, 2019
É o pensador que mais admiro até o momento. Pensa o tipo de Liberalismo em que acredito. Comprei este livro, pois em algum lugar estava dito que era uma boa introdução para seu pensamento. De fato é. Ficou registrado a sua concepção de "pluralismo de valores", que apresenta a ideia de que os valores que norteiam a boa vida humana podem ser muitos e diversos, o que os torna por vezes incomensuráveis. Não há a possibilidade, sustenta o pluralismo, de que se estabeleça uma hierarquia entre os valores, de maneira que ao menos um se coloque como o supremo, para o qual os demais devem sucumbir ao se tomar decisões.
October 18, 2023
I was inspired by my previous read. This is a collection of essays from 1951 - 1998. There is a lot of repetition as they were delivered to different audiences and Berlin's ideas did not change much over time. He was an amazing intellect. I realized as I read how many great thinkers I have never read.
I took lots of notes and have mixed his ideas from his discussions of other writers.
per Marx per Berlin: history: awareness of the processes of living and conscious direction
A reappearing question What does it mean for democracy in the 21st century where certainty has been rejected.
I must follow up with the thinkers.
I took lots of notes and have mixed his ideas from his discussions of other writers.
per Marx per Berlin: history: awareness of the processes of living and conscious direction
A reappearing question What does it mean for democracy in the 21st century where certainty has been rejected.
I must follow up with the thinkers.
March 2, 2025
Nominally a collection of odds'n'ends - radio talks, forewords, a transcript of an autobiographical tape, yet the level of readability and thought is generally high. Some things are of its time, like the notion of man as the default human being, or the three Zionist propaganda pieces from the early 1950s but the overall benevolence and striving towards liberty (of left-liberal type mainly) shines through.
December 25, 2020
Berlin es el gran historiador de las ideas filosóficas. En este texto encontrarás los debates sobre la autoridad, la libertad, la racionalidad, la ilustración, etc. Adicionalmente ejercita una bella crítica a las escuelas de pensamiento, iniciando en su propia casa de estudios, Oxford. Sin lugar a dudas, este es de los mejores libros del año y la edición de Página Indómita es fenomenal.
Want to read
September 21, 2020没读过以赛亚·伯林的读者，可以把这本书当作入门的阶梯，因为所有由他发现和阐述过的重要主题都在这里一一陈列。但同时也必须清楚，所有这些主题都有各自分量更重的著作立于他处，有待涉足。而读过他作品的读者，也照例能从中获得一种充满愉悦的阅读体验，尤其是那篇前所未见且异常精彩的《犹太人之被奴役与被解放》一文。无论如何，还是前言中的那句话更能道出我此刻的心声：“我无比羡慕那些仍然没有读过这些文章的人，他们面对的是一场精神的盛宴。”
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 25, 2017
My academic advisor made me read it.
January 15, 2021
3+, thought provoking, sometimes difficult to follow
January 15, 2022
Qualsiasi sia l'argomento trattato da Isaiah Berlin (sono diversi in questo libro, e abbastanza eterogenei), la sua capacità di avvicinarvisi, aprirlo, illuminarlo con la sua prosa limpida e gentile, e trasformarlo in qualcosa di chiaro ed afferrabile a tutti, questa capacità, da sola, è sufficiente a trasmettere un senso di meraviglia e appagamento che di rado si trova in altri autori. La sua capacità di andare nella profondità delle cose, ma senza diventare criptico, è qualcosa che in Italia ancora non conosciamo abbastanza.
April 21, 2022
Ótima análise
May 17, 2022
“民族主义的确是我们这个时代最具影响力，或许也是最具毁灭性的因素。如果人类会全部灭绝，起因很有可能是某个民族非理性地爆发出对某个真实存在或想象之中的敌人或压迫者的仇恨，而不是宗教或阶级；更有可能是种族层面的原因，而不是文明层面的原因。”
June 2, 2024
تا آخر نخوندمش . به نظرم خیلی پراکنده و سطحی به موضوعات پرداخته
یه جوری فست فود وار
یه جوری فست فود وار
October 22, 2024
读的第三本柏林的书，没有前两本《浪漫主义的根源》、《自由及其背叛》那么喜欢。以短篇文章为主，犹太人相关的几篇都跳读了，倒是阿维赛的前言挺值得一读，对柏林多了一分了解。
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews