The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy

Rating:
Summary: The dictionary is balanced and readable.
Review: This is the best of the philosophy "dictionaries". Far from a bias toward the East or against the Continent, the CDP has one fairly obvious selection critieria. Anybody still alive doesn't get in. There is no Derrida, but there is also no Putnam, no Davidson, no Searle, no Rorty, no Habermas, and so on. Each of these philosophers are discussed in articles about particular ideas. They just don't have biographical entries. The only serious quarrel I have concerns the use of the word "dictionary". Many basic philosophical terms are omitted and the articles, though coherent, balanced and readable, are of encyclopedic length. Looks more like a small encyclopedia of philosophy to me.

Rating:
Summary: The dictionary is balanced and readable.
Review: This is the best of the philosophy "dictionaries". Far from a bias toward the East or against the Continent, the CDP has one fairly obvious selection critieria. Anybody still alive doesn't get in. There is no Derrida, but there is also no Putnam, no Davidson, no Searle, no Rorty, no Habermas, and so on. Each of these philosophers are discussed in articles about particular ideas. They just don't have biographical entries. The only serious quarrel I have concerns the use of the word "dictionary". Many basic philosophical terms are omitted and the articles, though coherent, balanced and readable, are of encyclopedic length. Looks more like a small encyclopedia of philosophy to me.