Scan barcode
yates9's review
2.0
I love Russel and his insightful presentation of the last few thousand years of philosophy is well structured even if overly historicised
.
The problem is this book was from lectures written to the late 40’s and it leaves a gap that is just too wide for it to feel current. It is interesting in what main issues sre identified that are relevant today, but it also misses many others, the world philosophical issues have gone far beyond what is described and there remains a vast gap.
I wouod read a different history of philosophy despite my admiration for the author and his work.
.
The problem is this book was from lectures written to the late 40’s and it leaves a gap that is just too wide for it to feel current. It is interesting in what main issues sre identified that are relevant today, but it also misses many others, the world philosophical issues have gone far beyond what is described and there remains a vast gap.
I wouod read a different history of philosophy despite my admiration for the author and his work.
alanffm's review against another edition
5.0
An incredible overview of the history of Western philosophy. While far from perfect, Russel successfully tackles the central hypotheses and criticisms of the West's major philosophical ideas from the ancients up until the Second World War. My edition is a bit short of 900 pages and I feel like I haven't even begun to delve into anything - a testament to the scoping nature of this work. I strongly recommend this for anyone interested in learning about the Western cannon or philosophy in general, as it not only teaches the basics, but ties them together in a linear and lucid narrative.
declanmj's review against another edition
3.0
More interesting from a historical perspective than a philosophical one. In classical early twentieth-century style, opinion and amateur psychoanalysis of the book's subjects abound. This is both interesting and amusing although I worry that readers today may take this as factual. The later chapters are where the book most shows its age, particularly in the chapters on Nietzsche where various knowledge has changed since 1945. Well worth a read, Russell is entertaining and educative throughout.
maximz's review
3.0
When I die.. I want it engraved in my tomb (go big or go home) that I finished this book. While there is certainly a wealth of information in this book I found very little of it engaging. Regardless, I appreciate the accumulation of this history and how it is presented. If you want to read philosophy.. read another book. If you want a historical background of what was going on when your favorite philosopher wrote their thoughts down.. then this book might be for you!
bonsai_leaf's review
3.0
Maybe a good intro but he can't help but give his personal opinion on all of the philosophers in the book. Which might make it better or worse depending on how you look at it.
schmavery's review
3.0
This felt like a fairly comprehensive account of the development of philosophy in the west, but it's hard to know how much I was able to absorb.
The book is written in a way that I felt was very scattered. Some sections have an incredible amount of seemingly unrelated detail, such as the relationships between each Pope and their contemporary kings/emperors throughout the period characterized by the power of the Catholic Church.
Each philosopher ends up being described in relation to the ideas before and after their work. I felt that this confuses the timeline and adds a lot of speculation about how the older philosopher may have responded to newer ideas.
The last section feels dated at times with references to current events, but the majority of the book addresses ideas old enough not to have this feeling.
As far as content is concerned, I found the book spent a lot of time on metaphysical theories, most of which seemed to have limited justification. Of course that’s probably more of a commentary on the philosophers than the author.
In general, a more focused version of this book probably would have been closer to what I had personally hoped for. Spending more time was on fewer philosophers would have helped keep them all clear in my head and fully understand the ideas.
The book is written in a way that I felt was very scattered. Some sections have an incredible amount of seemingly unrelated detail, such as the relationships between each Pope and their contemporary kings/emperors throughout the period characterized by the power of the Catholic Church.
Each philosopher ends up being described in relation to the ideas before and after their work. I felt that this confuses the timeline and adds a lot of speculation about how the older philosopher may have responded to newer ideas.
The last section feels dated at times with references to current events, but the majority of the book addresses ideas old enough not to have this feeling.
As far as content is concerned, I found the book spent a lot of time on metaphysical theories, most of which seemed to have limited justification. Of course that’s probably more of a commentary on the philosophers than the author.
In general, a more focused version of this book probably would have been closer to what I had personally hoped for. Spending more time was on fewer philosophers would have helped keep them all clear in my head and fully understand the ideas.