Critique On The Historical Philosophy Of Critical Rationalism

Clinging to Historicism means clinging to Marxist historical materialism, which is the demarcation of pro- or anti- Marxist, and that is the important question that western anti-Marxist paid great attention to. Karl Popper, a representative of critical rationalism, is of no exception, and his criticism on Marx's historicism is extraordinary far-reaching to some extent. This paper is dedicated to objectively remark on Popper's criticism to achieve some reflection results. At first it analyses the theory and the structure of the critical rationalism and the role and the significance of historical philosophy of critical reason have been analyzed at first. Popper's historical philosophy is not attached to but deeply rooted in the scientific philosophy of critical rationalism and the objective knowledge science. Furthermore, it has borne itself as an independent section.The process of Popper's criticism on Marx's historicism has been divided into four parts: Firstly, criticism on that "the history has laws". Secondly, criticism on that "the history can be predicted". Thirdly, criticism on "revolutionary fight" and "class revolution". Fourthly, Popper's suggestions of "piecemeal engineering" and ethics. The core of Popper's anti-historicism is to oppose that "the history has laws", which starts with the criticism of "the history can be predicted", and the latter proposition is derived from the former too. It is also one of Popper's criticism that "revolutionary war is the way to shorten and ease the period of suffering to achieve new regimes", which is deduced by "the history can be predicted".Popper's historical philosophy of critical rationalism has been analysed into three parts: Firstly, "context analysis" on Popper's historical philosophy, which sheds light on his criticism basically and which is virtually the method of himself. Secondly, objective investigation on Popper's comprehension about Marxist historical materialism. As a matter of fact, he has several mistakes on his comprehension about Marxism, which are related to his degree of comprehension about Marxist works as well as his investigation purpose as such. To sum up, his mistakes are resulted from his mis-understandings on the historicism, historical laws, historical predication, materialism, dialectics, class, class struggle and station theory from Marx. Thirdly, analysis on the methodology of Popper's historical philosophy, including his mainthoughts as well.Popper is a philosopher who wrote works for the times. Though Popper's critical reason is full of mistakes in refuting the historicism, he can still be regarded as an influential historical philosopher. With regard to his criticism and methodology on the historicism, they are both of that Marxists have to face to and learn from it. So does it when it comes to his methodology. Popper's critical rationalism stressed the deepness of criticism so much so that it bring about some changes in the discourse of post-modernism, whereas his rationalism contradict himself.