Customer Reviews

Man in the Modern Age

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In a letter to Hannah Arendt, Jaspers complained about the English translation of this work - we need a new translation! The contents of this work are as relevant today as they were in 1933. What I found most fascinating, though, was that many of his ideas mirror the existentialism (authenticity, etc) of Heidegger's Being in Time, even though Jaspers claimed he couldn't make it through his former friend's work. His concerns with technology (technique as it is translated) and nihilism (nullity) also mirror Heidegger's concern in the 30's.
Sometimes Jaspers is difficult to read, possibly because he presents arguments in the form of antinomies - these difficulties are absent in this passionate work from the heart. It is accessible for any reader and should be used in existentialism courses in philosophy departments.

Most of Karl Jaspers better books are out of print or are very hard to get. This is one of them, I had the book custom made from a computer print out & then hard bound. Written between World War One & World War Two, in 1933, I am surprised on how well Karl Jaspers understands humanity trapped within modern technology with its so-called promises yet in the end traps. The book explains the origin of modern techonolgy & how it developed into the present state of existence that humanity now finds itself. The middle secion deals with the Limits of the Life Order (Humanity as a Mass), the Will in the Whole (the State & Education), & the Decay & Possibilities of the Mind (Culture & Mental Creation: Art, Science, & Philosophy) and then the book ends with our Present existence in the fields of Sociology, Psychology, & Anthropology, & what humanity can become. A great find & here it is in Amazon.com as a special order.

If you, by any chance, stumble upon this book, most probably it will be in a library of some sort, you'll be looking to a small masterpiece. I am well aware of the fact that calling something 'masterpiece' in these days doesn' mean a lot. Everything is a masterpiece for some person or another, and in these days of hiperproduction one is constantly on a verge of loosing any notion of critical ability that existed somewhere. But enoguh of that. Considering what has been said, one should expect of me to say why something, precisely this book, is a maasterpiece.

As with all masterpieces it is really hard to say. It depends on a perspective you are taking. For instance, Mona Lisa. Looked upon with ordinary eyes, it is just a painting of some lady that is smiling with some arcadian background. What's so special about that? To answer that question one has to have special kind of glasses. Ones that will give him the insight in entire history of art, of all things that precedded Leonardos painting. Eventually, one would find the answer that he seeks. It is slightly different with this book.

Here, it is not the past that matters, it is the future. Consider this book being written in 1931., few years away from massive slaughter and dawnfall of humankind and entire humanities (as viewed by some intellectuals). It is surprising, and somewhat scarry, reading about the events that happened after the book was written. Certain insights, feelings of depression that is present in entire body of text, when looked upon from some historical distance, seems like a work of sad, mad, genius that looked upon the heart of humanity and found only destruction and despair there.

Maybe it is not masterpiece, maybe it is just a classic. No matter what, it is a book that should be read by any one who is interested in history, in development of modern thought, by anyone who is in trouble with the course modern world is taking today.