Rating: 
Summary: ...And What a History He Gives Us!
Review: Bertrand Russell's "History of Western Philosophy," quite simply, is the best all-around history I've seen. Will Durant's is accessible but more informative about its subjects lives than their thoughts. Copleston's history is much more informative but much too long (11 vol.) for any but the most serious student. Antony Flew's, for all of its strenghts, presumes much more technical knowlege than the average lay reader will have. Russell's book, then, seems the best all around intro - it is long enough but not too long, detailed enough but not overly technical, and interesting enough while remaining all the while informative. And unlike all of the others, Russell writes with the impeccable clarity we expect from him, and admirable enthusiasm.
Russell's layout is thus: he sets the stage for each section (ancient, scholastic, enlightenment, romantic, modern) by giving a brief historical chapter. Once done, he sets to work on a 10-20 page walk through of each prominent philosopher therein. While he is quite objective throughout (with the occasional biting remark for humor), he generally finishes each 'walk through' with a critique from his perspective of the philosopher in question. These are useful for both the lay person (who has fodder for thought) and the more experienced reader (who gets both the philosopher's and Russell's view).
Before I finish my review of this remarkably clear and interesting book, I must present a quote from the book that I feel is endemic of Russell and how he approaches all the multifarious philosophers that fill these pages. The quote intros his section on Greek philosopher Heraclitus:
"In studying a philosopher, the right attitude is neither reverence nor contempt, but first, a kind of hypothetical sympathy, until it is possible to know what it feels like to bleieve in his theories, and only then a revival of the critical attitude... Two things are to be remembered: that a man whose opinions and theories are worth studying may be presumed to have had some intellegence, but that no man is likely to have arrived at complete and final truth on any subject whatever." (Chapter IV, paragraph 4)
Yes, Russell has biases (as has been duly noted in these reviews); yes, he makes occasional biting comments and undoubtedly betrays misunderstandings (though none, I think, deliberate). All the while though, it is obvious that in these pages, Russell presents his subject as honestly, excitedly, and (yes!) fairly as he can. Even when he does express his opinion, it seems obvious to me that he lets you know when he is doing so, and never proposes (as do many philosophers) to have the last word on the subject or to make the readers' minds up for them.
Excellent book.
Rating:
Summary: A Wonderful Introduction to Western Philosophy
Review: Bertrand Russell's Hist. of Western Philosophy is an incredible introduction to the history of philosophy. If you want a straightforward description of each philosopher, I would recommend the encyclopedia, but if you want an in depth discussion of the philosopher's views, who he was influenced by, and his influence on other philosophers, Russell can't be beat. This book can be read straight through, or you can flip to the chapter on the philosopher or field of philosophy you want to learn about. The only problem with this book is that it deals with so many philosophers that it can only give about 10-20 pages to each philosopher (but longer to more influential philosophers like Plato and Locke), so if you need a great deal of info, this book won't be perfect. But this books advantages far outweigh its faults. My personal favorite part is Russell's commentary on each philosopher - he points out the strengths and weaknesses of each philosopher's philosophy. I highly recommend this volume for anyone interested in this wonderful subject.
Rating:
Summary: A Great Work for Research and Philosophy
Review: Bertrand Russell's history of western philosophy makes a great reference work to philosophers and philosophy at large. Naturally Russell, being a philosopher less than a historian, he is critical of the thinkers he canvasses throughout the work. That being said, the history really is great. Russell, being the positivist, isn't too critical on the great thinkers of less enlightened times. Understanding that Russell's views don't discount the philosophies but provide an argument to them, we can use this work as a great reference to philosophy without a great investment of time.
This is the real beauty of the work: it makes a great reference work. If you don't feel like reading the entire thing (which I do suggest) you can use the work in piecemeal. This book provides basic understanding of the tenets of a philosopher while also provide a quick background of the life and times of the philosopher. I have used this book on several occasions to cross reference ideas and re-acquaint myself with the philosophers.
Russell, in writing this book, chose to be concise and this can be seen as a drawback. His descriptions of philosophers and philosophies are by no means complete but they are in the short space he uses filled with information and anecdotes. Naturally he weights the time he spends towards the more important philosophers: he gives a vast section to St Augustine while we spends a scant page and a half on William of Ockham. This makes sense of course and the data he provides on the obscure is certainly enough to wet the mouth so to speak and allow the reader to do some research on his own -- you will have no trouble doing this because the research is well document through a great bibliography.
A major complaint I have seen in regards to this book is that it covers little of the 20th century. I can see why this can be seen as a defect but we must remember that Russell was writing a history and not a field guide. At the time this was first written and even in the times later additions could have been produced the philosophies of existentialism and postmodern relativism etc were still at the forefront of the philosophical debate (in the present) and writing a history on this probably seem absurd.
While Russell himself was apologetic about the way he handled this book in making it less than complete, we should praise him for creating it. Overall it is an excellent work and handled with the command of subject and history that is most rare especially in our times. I wont say that this is the only history of philosophy you should read but it may well be the best. I implore students of philosophy and students of history to get and use this book. If you do not fit into those categories get this book anyway... you will find it not dry but delightful.
-- Ted Murena
Rating:
Summary: A classic review of philosophy...
Review: Don't be put off by the criticisms of emphasis and slighting of particular philosophers... This is a truly brilliant overview of western philosophy. Not for the casual reader, but if you have a real interest in philosophy you must read this book completely.
Rating:
Summary: History of Western Philosophy
Review: History of Western Philosophy is Russell's attempt to reduce the breadth of intelligence, wisdom, creativity and thought of philosophy throughout the last two and a half thousand years. While in places the book is weak, and his personal bias shines through often, this is still a monumental work, and should be read by anyone interested in learning philosophy but unsure where to begin.The book begins with an introduction stating Russell's intent in very clear language. He is not interested in providing a detailed thesis on each of the major philosophers, nor is he willing or able to give enough of a background so that the casual reader will become conversant in his philosophers of choice. Rather, the intent is to give an overview, to whet the appetite, to stimulate the mind with what higher thinking is capable of. From there, we are given a brief account of the history and importance of the Greeks before plunging into a chapter by chapter exposition of major authors. It is an important part of this book that Russell allows us a look into the historical, economical and political aspects of each period. A proper understanding of a particular philosopher's thinking us not possible without at least some background in the conditions and prevalent thinking of the time. Without knowing of the huge importance of religion in the 15th and 16th century, is it so easy to appreciate Machiavelli's philosophy on power at all costs? No. As I said earlier, there are faults. Obviously, Russell has his own personal philosophy, and where there are other philosophers who disagree either in part or totally, he gives them short shrift. Kant and Nietzsche in particular are dealt with harshly, I feel, and this is mostly because Russell's views are almost completely opposite. However, importantly, he does not hide this point. He always refers to his opinions as his, and you are allowed to disagree. From the introduction it is clear that he is a person with an opinion, where you agree, perfect. Where you don't, he gives a clear enough appraisal that it doesn't really matter. In the end, this book serves only as an introduction. If you want to learn more, read the actual texts discussed as well as commentary from specialists. The goal of this book was to give a broad history, a coherent starting point and an easy access catalogue of great thinkers. In all of these goals Russell succeeds, and nowhere does he truly fail.
Rating:
Summary: Russell is witty, irreverent, and profound.
Review: I didn't read Bertrand Russell's "History of Western Philosophy" because I was looking for a cheerleader for Nietzsche. I might expect a bland "even-handed" treatment from an undergraduate but by the time Bertrand Russell wrote his history, he and Alfred North Whitehead had already taken Western Philosophy and Mathematics into new territory. Alan Turing himself, arguably the true inventor of the computer, found his inspiration in symbolic logic and in the"Principia Mathematica" specifically. I would feel cheated by anything less than a "critical" review of Nietzsche from Russell. To criticize Russell on this basis is akin to trying to discredit Voltaire for lampooning Leibniz as "Dr. Pangloss". Western Civilization is enriched by both. Moreover, Russell's criticisms are always accompanied by great wit --in themselves relevant contributions to the history of Philosophy. Russell's wit has been compared to that of Voltaire and the very idea of objective, even-handed accounts of Catholicism from Voltaire, for example, is absurd. The idea of "objectivity" is highly over-rated in any case. No one expects a prosecutor to make the case for the defense case while stating his own; it is equally absurd to expect a philosopher whose stature is at least that of Nietzsche to serve us up a PC version of a philosophy that --taken to its logical implications --resulted in fascism and Nazism. If you want a bland history of Philosophy, read an encyclopedic entry knocked off by a professional writer; if you want a perspective on Philosophy from one of the great intellects of the 20th Century and can accommodate a perspective which may differ from your own --read Russell and be enriched.
Rating: 
Summary: A valuable introduction from a non-theistic perspective
Review: I have enjoyed Russell's fluid style of writing very much and this single volume History of Western Philosophy is a good quick reference and relatively easy reading for anyone interested in the subject matter. Many works of this nature tend to be laborious and thus discouraging to a newcomer. Russell's book is a joy to read. Regardless of some personal differences in his treatment of certain philosophers I highly recommend the book.
Rating:
Summary: breathtaking
Review: I have long been a fan of Bertrand Russell's books, and this is one of my absolute favorites. I have read it several times, and I still go back from time to time and re-read individual chapters. This is a very human history of philosophy; you get a real sense of the times and concerns the philosophers faced. In addition to an overview of Western philosophy, it also provides a fairly in-depth history of the West. The chapters on individual philosophers are punctuated by ones dealing strictly with historical developments and trends. Russell is famous for both his fairness and his outspokenness about his own views. He does not always agree with certain philosophers, but he tries to present them fairly before stating his objections. He is also fearless in presenting what he thinks is significant. How many other books on philosophy present a chapter on Byron as philosopher/exemplar of the Romantic Rebel? A side note. In his autobiography, Russell tells about the composition of this History. He wrote much of it during WWII while staying near Denver. During very hot days he would retire to a little cottage and take off all his clothes. The image of Russell composing this wonderful and insightful book mainly in the nude is quite delightful.
Rating:
Summary: The best book on western philosophy history
Review: I have read the Chinese version of this book, it is so good that I cannot let it go. The books exhibits the volumous knowledge and sharp thinking of Berti.
Rating:
Summary: Thorough, but unfair to some German Philosophies.
Review: I read this book in college (Wisconsin-Madison)and used it as the focus of a semester's final thesis. We were being challenged to actively refute a philosophical writing. I was fortunate to get this book before my classmates - because Russell wrote it in 1945, it is at times malicious to the Germanic Philosophies. Shocked that he was so shortsighted, he later begged redemption to a degree. Still a must for even the layperson to read at some point. The book reads as difficultly as the reader wishes.
|
