| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() Gutschein erhalten
Tauschen Sie jetzt A History of Western Philosophy (Routledge Classics) gegen einen Amazon-Gutschein in Höhe von EUR 6,95 ein - einlösbar für Tausende von Artikeln bei Amazon.de. Entdecken Sie mehr eintauschbare Bücher im Bücher Trade-In Shop. Bitte beachten Sie die Teilnahmebedingungen.
Jetzt für Amazon Student anmelden und um 20% erhöhten Eintauschwert sichern. |
Produktinformation
Möchten Sie die Produktinformationen aktualisieren oder Feedback zu den Produktabbildungen geben?
Ist der Verkauf dieses Produkts für Sie nicht akzeptabel? |
Vorgeschlagene Tags zu ähnlichen Produkten(Was ist das?)Setzen Sie den ersten relevanten Tag hinzu (ein Schlüsselwort, das mit diesem Produkt in engem Zusammenhang steht).
|
Despite this book's well-deserved status as a classic work, it has some major flaws that a reader should keep in mind, all stemming from Russell's intolerance of viewpoints different from his own. Russell, like other logical positivists, saw no place for metaphysics in philosophy. In his "History of Western Philosophy," he makes no effort to curb that bias, resulting in what might be considered unfair treatments of all thinkers who did not stick purely to science. Also, Russell has no tolerance for systems of thought that do not conform to his preferences for democracy, atheism, pacifism, and social liberalism. So Plato is described as just another proponent of totalitarianism, Rousseau is portrayed as a crackpot and Nietzsche is depicted as a warmonger, but the much less significant thinkers John Dewey and William James get personal kudos for being nice progressive guys full of human kindness. Russell's book is a great place to start, but to get a fair treatment of thinkers such as Rousseau and Nietzsche, it should be supplemented with material such as the chapters on those thinkers in Strauss and Cropsey's "History of Political Philosophy." And, of course, read Copleston's "History of Philosophy" if you have time.
Although Russell always includes a personal commentary on a particular philosopher, this does not undermine the objectivity and value of his analysis, because it is fairly easy to see where a summary of what the philospher had to say ends and Russell's interpretation begins. Russell's erudition is truly impressive. I agree with almost all of his assessments of philosophers in this volume. Russel was a logician, not a scientist--there is a big difference. The book was written in 1943, yet Russell seems unaware of Popper's falsifability criterion for statements that purport to be scientific. But generally, the book is very close to perfection. This is philosophy in context and ideas brought to life from one of the best writers and one of the most brilliant minds of the twentieth century.
The clever and not overly technical writing make philosophy actually an fun thing to do. Great Book, highly recommendable
|
Das Forum zu diesem Produkt
Fragen stellen, Meinungen austauschen, Einblicke gewinnen Aktive Diskussionen in ähnlichen Foren
Kundendiskussionen durchsuchen
|
Ähnliche Foren
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|