[.ca] Wittgensteins Poker (ISBN 0571209092)

From Amazon.co.uk:
Wittgenstein's Poker is a mini biography of the lives of Karl Popper and Ludwig Wittgenstein leading up to their one and only meeting at the Cambridge moral science club in October 1946 where their loud and aggressive confrontation became the stuff of legend. What happened? Why did the two great philosophers behave as they did? What did Popper have against Wittgenstein? At stake was the meaning and direction of the analytic revolution--which had been led by Bertrand Russell --and, ultimately, the purpose of philosophy itself. Edmonds and Eidinow's treatment is a very clever and interesting way to introduce the history of philosophy in the first third of the 20th century. The 10 minute argument provides an effective and fascinating organising focus for the whole book--not only because one is curious to find out who said what and why--but because to understand what really happened involves finding out what kind of men these great philosophers were, and how they stood to the philosophic tradition. Popper's opposition to Wittgenstein however, was more than just a difference in philosophic views; on a deeper level Wittgenstein represented the Vienna that had been out of reach even to the son of a respected and socially responsible lawyer: "In Wittgenstein he saw the imperial city where riches and status commanded respect and opened doors, the separate territory where inflation-wrought poverty had no place and the Nazis could be bought off." It is the social and political background of the story, the class differences, as well as the philosophic differences between the two great philosophers which makes this book so unusual and interesting. Part biography, part social history, part history of philosophy Wittgenstein's Poker is informative, entertaining and accessible. --Larry Brown

Worth a read:
A meeting when two famous philosopher were drawn into a debate at Cambridge University's Moral Science Club in room H3 in which one of the Protaganists (Ludwig Wittgenstein) brandished a poker from the fireplace and waved it, in what may or may not have been, a threatening manner is the premise of this book. Edmonds and Eidinow try to contextualise this by means of a biography of both of these philosopers as well as a retelling of the then current change in analytic philosophy from a strictly epistemological to a linguistic emphasis. What philosophy there is in the book (and there is not much) is described well and succinctly. The overriding motif of the book is (to my reading) how unbelievably childish both these men were (particularly Wittgenstein). Wittgenstein's Poker is not going to break new ground in philosophical understanding, it is the non-fiction equivalent of a Catherine Cookson or Celine Deon; it is, however, a charming and funny book. Hence if you are soon taking a long train journey or the like and consider Descarte's Philosophical Meditations too taxing then Wittgenstein's poker is the book for you. Any book that can quote the following from Bertrand Russell as part of a serious point is worthy of a purchase!: "I used to go there \oEngland's South Coast\c alone to watch the sunset and contemplate suicide. I did not, however, commit suicide, because I wished toknow more about Mathematics" (p175)

Philosophy Lite:
As much as I was enjoying this book, about two thirds of the way through I decided it was real trash. Then I came to the philosophical part and my opinion changed significantly. This is what I had been going to say in my review: When an abstruse issue in science captures the public imagination it is often considered a good idea to make it more accessible by writing about the personalities involved. This 'humanizes' the issue, in other words replaces actual scientific knowledge (which is technical and hard to understand)with gossip. "Wittgenstein's Poker" takes this approach to philosophy. It is about a debate between two of the greatest philosophers of the twentieth century (Wittgenstein and Popper)on the subject of whether philosophers deal with problems or merely puzzles. The authors do not take sides explicitly, but whenever they refer to a philosophical issue or idea they state it very briefly and give no indication at all as to why anyone should care about such an apparently trivial matter or bother with such banal or (seemingly) obviously false ideas. Philosophy, we are led to believe, is a complete waste of time. And philosophers are losers. Wittgenstein is presented as a callous weirdo, Popper as a resentful egomaniac. The entire philosophy faculty of Cambridge University in 1946 is also written off. If ever anyone had an unkind word to say about these men then it is quoted here, with little or nothing to offset it by way of praise or even neutral description. You can see why the book is fun to read. But it's a little odd in a book aimed presumably at those with an interest in philosphy. Or perhaps it's not so odd. Maybe pseudo-intellectuals want nothing more than an invitation to sneer at the real intelligentsia. That's what I had been going to write. But then I came to the chapter that actually explains some of the issues (induction, probability, etc.) that concerned Popper and Bertrand Russell, and what they thought about them. This was interesting and well done. There is some real meat here for those unfamiliar with philosophy, albeit a cutlet rather than a roast. You won't learn much about Wittgenstein, though, except about his life and personality. Why anyone should care exactly what happened with the poker is beyond me, but this is a fun book and might even be an effective introduction to philosophy for some people.

Oddball Achievement:
Academic intrigue inside a jounalistic context -- not the most compatible or promising of bedfellows. Still and all, the book remains oddly entertaining despite inbuilt limitations. From the text, a smattering can be learned about the following: Anglo-Austrian philosophy, two of its most unpleasant luminaries, late Habsburg Vienna, rivalries at Cambridge, and last but not least, more than you may ever want to know about an obscure event from 1946. It's this latter that forms the book's centerpiece, and it's a testament to the authors' chutzpah that they are able to magnify this seemingly innocuous confrontation into a climactic and meaningful clash of intellects. Expectations build as the narrative meanders toward what really happened in room H-3, King's College, Cambridge, as two massive egos of the ivory tower, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Karl Popper, at last collide. The actual upshot is a disappointment, and its meagreness can be taken as an ironical commentary on the elusive nature of Truth and Reality, an outcome not unbefitting a subject of this kind. Then too, the authors take liberties in filling out subjective detail, at the same time, neither the material nor the chapters cohere well despite the tenacity of purpose. Also, I agree with reviewer Walter Horn that Popper's reputation is inflated to approximate Wittgenstein's, without which much of the drama would dissipate. Nonetheless, the issue between the two remains a key one: Does traditional philosophy rest on anything other than linguistic confusion. Don't expect an answer or even a preference from the authors. All in all and despite the many drawbacks, the book stands as something of an oddball achievement, though it poses a genuine risk to those who care nothing about baldness and the dead king of France.

Excellent Overview of a Famous Meeting:
To often in philosophy, we forget the personalities. This book may not break much new ground concerning the fateful encounter between Popper and Wittgenstein, but it is a delightful synoptic account of the time, issues at stake, and the players.

Absolutely Charming:
You would not think that it was possible to write a book for the general reader about a ten minute argument between two little known mid-twentieth century philosophers and have it be a best seller. This book proves that belief to be very wrong. The confrontation between Ludwig Wittgenstein and Carl Popper in October of 1946 is a minor footnote in the history of philosophy, but it provides a foil for the authors to explore the histories of these two men and the world in which they lived. After setting the stage by describing the confrontation, the authors turn to an examination of the lives of the two philosophers, both from Vienna, both powerful intellects, both giant egos. The emphasis here is on historical context, not on philosophy, so the story is very accessible to the general reader. The account of their lives before World War II is fascinating. The description of the academic world in which they worked is vividly drawn. The authors have given us a real sense of who these two men were and have introduced the reader to the supporting cast of characters as well. The authors have wisely avoid an analysis of the sexual lives of the two protagonists, though Wittgenstein's personal life is alluded to at a couple of points. The philosophical issues are presented late in the book and are explained carefully and simply, so that the lay reader will see the intellecual stakes involved in the argument. While both men are presented as driven, they are sympathetically portrayed and within the context of the lives they lived, seem quite compelling. This book captured for me the feeling of being there and gave me a real sense of time and place. The book is short but compelling. I recommend it highly for the reader interested in the lives of intellectuals mid Twentieth Century.