Fact of the day

I feel rather sorry for Karl Popper. His output was far more useful than Wittgenstein's (if such a statement can be made at all), but Wittgenstein is canonised as some mystical troubled genius who delivered these impenetrable insights about the composition of reality. IMO Popper had a much higher demonstrable effect/output, but is scarcely remembered.

I have time for Wittgenstien's biography (as you mentioned, most people do) and his style. Beyond that, he is beyond me.

Popper, on the other hand, can fuck right off. (Worst reading of Plato EVER).

I'll take Oakeshott as my Britain-based 20th century Conservative historian of ideas/philosopher, any day of the week (I say Britain-based because I have a soft spot for Strauss).