A Clutch of Introductory Books to Philosophy 2
1 Bad Thoughts: A Guide to Clear Thinking, Jamie Whyte (2003), London: Corvo.
Jamie Whyte is a past lecturer of philosophy at Cambridge University and winner of Analysis journal's prestigious prize for the best article by a philosopher under 30. He is a New Zealander. He is now around 49 years of age and is a politician, or at least an aspiring one in his country of birth - See HERE. This is a book written for the total neophyte in philosophy. It aims to expose common "crimes" (an exaggeration surely) against good thinking - and indeed there are many of those encountered on our daily rounds no matter what our profession is. He tells us that the genesis of this wee book is his "outrage" (is he poking fun?) at errors in reasoning, muddled thinking and logical fallacies committed all too widely. He further informs us that initially he wrote to papers as a way of expressing, or indeed expiating, this anger and frustration. The first chapter exposes the authority fallacy for its most obvious weakness, namely telling anyone who questions our instructions on any matter that "It's true because I told you so." And, from there, Dr Whyte launches into his exposition of this fallacy. Chapter two looks at the fallacy of prejudice and how it dresses itself up in ever more fancy robes once it initially gets away with its "crime." Even a not-so-astute reader can notice a certain prejudice in the author's treatment of religious faith in this chapter on prejudice - ironically enough. And indeed, perhaps I have shown my own prejudice and bias in alluding to it. Chapter 3 is about what is known as "argumentum ad hominem" fallacy or "getting personal" in an argument which Dr Whyte labels quite imperatively as: "Shut up!" Chapter 4 is a superb exposition of words used as smoke screens to say practically nothing of substance on a topic (politicians are good at this. Need I remind the reader that our author is an aspiring politician - see above!), and the writer gives us wonderful examples of this tendency even in academic circles. Chapter 5 treats of what he calls motive fallacy, a fallacy, he argues, that proceeds by ascribing certain motives to the opposition or to those with whom one is arguing - "they would say that, wouldn't they?" Other topics tackled are inconsistency, equivocation and begging the question. This book has an edge to it, almost too much so for any philosopher worth his/her salt as one can feel the righteous anger and indignation of the author behind the material, making it not quite as good and as balanced an introduction to critical and clear thinking as is Thinking from A to Z, (third edition) Nigel Warburton (2007), London: Routledge or Do you think what you think you think?: The Ultimate Philosophical Quiz Book, Julian Baggini & Jeremy Stangroom (2006), London: Granta. (Reviewed in my previous post HERE) Nonetheless, this book is a quick, entertaining and easy read for all its faults, and it will certainly make you think and raise obvious criticisms and objections at various junctures in the text. I will keep it on my shelves.
This is not a beginner's book. Neither is it one solely for graduates in the field. It is, though, a good book for undergraduates and for all non-experts with a general interest in the subject. It provides the reader with an anthology of interviews on a variety of philosophical topics with experts in their particular field. Among the professional philosophers interviewed are Simon Blackburn, Mary Midgley, Roger Scruton and Peter Singer to name four of the 22 interviewees. Two experts (there are others) outside the field of philosophy who are interviewed are Richard Dawkins (a zoologist) and Russell Stannard (a physicist). However, that experts from other fields are interviewed is not surprising given the range of subjects explored in this comprehensive book, namely, Darwin's legacy, Science, Religion, Philosophy and Society, Metaphysics and Language. Within each section there are either three or four interviews on the topic. Baggini and Stangroom in their equally comprehensive and insightful introduction emphasize wisely that philosophy is "a subject which crosses borders, and full time philosophers do not have a monopoly on the subject." (p. 5) The authors point out rightly that experts from the various fields of science, sociology, linguistics and theology interviewed of necessity have to stray into the realm of philosophy because of the fundamental questions they are asking and are attempting to answer in their legitimate inquiries in their respective fields: "The fact that thinkers outside philosophy are often drawn to such questions shows how philosophy is in some sense the fundamental intellectual discipline." (p. 6) Interestingly, all the interviews collected within the covers of this superb introductory text, had their origin in being published in The Philosophers' Magazine between 1998 and 2002, a magazine of which both our authors are editors. However, many of them have been re-worked, added to and filled out by further interviews with their authors. So, if you want to learn about issues like free will, the relationship between science and philosophy, whether God exists or not, whether this is even a question worth asking, how language carries meaning and whether making war is ethically right, then this is the book for you. And further, if you want such questions dealt with in a dialogical form, then you will be doubly blessed.
This book is the written version of radio interviews on various philosophical topics with experts in those fields. Further, they were originally aired as podcasts, that is a digital medium that consists of audio, video or digital radio files subscribed to and downloaded through the web. Within the covers of this small compendium, the reader will be able to read the responses of 25 of the liveliest and most entertaining philosophers of our time to the questions of interviewers who are themselves working in the field of philosophy. Some of the topics discussed are: Relativism, Animal Rights, Friendship, Discrimination, Minority Rights, Multiculturalism, Infinity, Scepticism, the God question and the Problem of Evil among many others. I especially liked the early contention of the editors that "[t]he spirit of philosophy is at its most apparent in conversation - the probing, the teasing out of opinions, the search for reasons and justifications." (p. xi) There is a wonderful chapter that contains a plethora of definitions of what philosophy is for various philosophers by way of a foreword to the book, and one definition offered by Professor Anthony Kenny appealed to me on first reading it: "Philosophy is thinking as clearly as possible about the most fundamental concepts that reach through all disciplines." (p. xvii) That in itself is a masterpiece of succinct thought. This is an excellent introduction to the wide range of topics that populate the field of philosophy and well worth having on your shelves if you are interested in the subject.
4. Think: A Compelling Introduction to Philosophy, Simon Blackburn (2001), Oxford: OUP.
In short, this is a far more high-brow introduction to philosophy than the seven I have reviewed in these pages so far. Simon Blackburn is professor emeritus of philosophy at the University of Cambridge. He has written much academic material in his subject area over the years, e.g., Spreading the Word (1984), Essays in Quasi-Realism (1993) and Being Good (2011) among many others. He was also editor of the prestigious philosophical journal Mind from 1984 to 1990. He suggests in his introduction that philosophy asks the following types of questions: What am I? What is consciousness? Am I a puppet or have I free will? Why is there something rather than nothing? What is the difference between past and future? How can I be really sure that the world is at it seems to be? What is knowledge? What does it mean to know something? What are values and duties? What are rights? (pp. 2 -3) He stresses that it is humankind's capacity to be self-reflective that allows it to ask these questions. He further underlines the fact that philosophy is never about how much you know, but rather always about acquiring good thinking skills. (See p. 5) The headings of the various chapters in this thought-provoking and challenging book are: Knowledge, Mind, Free Will, The Self, God, Reasoning, The World and What to Do. All the chapters are gripping, stimulating and challenging - full of meaty questions. I found the chapter on "The Self" the most interesting, the most informative and the most challenging. In this chapter, Blackburn asks of us the question: "Who is the 'I' in the statement 'I am' or 'I love porridge.'? Is the self the same as the mind? Is it the same as the religious concept of soul? Is the self a mere "bundle of perceptions."? (John Hume.) Is the self simple or composite? (Thomas Reid.) Does the self endure over time? Am I the same person at 10 as I am at 30 or 50? Is the self an organizing principle? What about the story (joke) about the Irish axe that had been in the family for several generations, except that it had several new handles and several new heads? What about the case of the ship belonging to Thesius where eventually over time every single part of it had been replaced. Is this the same ship that our hero started out with? Simor Blackburn avers that "(t)hinking can help, but it is hard for it to destroy the illusions of the self." So we can see here where Blackburn stands on the reality of the self. Be that as it may, this present reviewer, who has spent some time in therapy, has of necessity been conscious of his being a human phenomenon, better know as the self, which he sought to get to know better and also to heal and inspire. It is very hard indeed to dispense with a notion of the self, then, either in therapy or in the workaday world of our own short existence. This book is for the more high brow reader, for that person who believes that there are big questions out there that must be addressed by humans if they wish to be content and satisfied in this world. Blackburn argues that we must attempt to answer these questions if we are to live a meaningful life. In brief, this is a sharp, well-reasoned, fair, comprehensive and at all times an incisive introduction to the engaging world of philosophy. It is at once stimulating and challenging and an important addition to any would-be philosopher's library.
 |
| My copy of Whyte |
Jamie Whyte is a past lecturer of philosophy at Cambridge University and winner of Analysis journal's prestigious prize for the best article by a philosopher under 30. He is a New Zealander. He is now around 49 years of age and is a politician, or at least an aspiring one in his country of birth - See HERE. This is a book written for the total neophyte in philosophy. It aims to expose common "crimes" (an exaggeration surely) against good thinking - and indeed there are many of those encountered on our daily rounds no matter what our profession is. He tells us that the genesis of this wee book is his "outrage" (is he poking fun?) at errors in reasoning, muddled thinking and logical fallacies committed all too widely. He further informs us that initially he wrote to papers as a way of expressing, or indeed expiating, this anger and frustration. The first chapter exposes the authority fallacy for its most obvious weakness, namely telling anyone who questions our instructions on any matter that "It's true because I told you so." And, from there, Dr Whyte launches into his exposition of this fallacy. Chapter two looks at the fallacy of prejudice and how it dresses itself up in ever more fancy robes once it initially gets away with its "crime." Even a not-so-astute reader can notice a certain prejudice in the author's treatment of religious faith in this chapter on prejudice - ironically enough. And indeed, perhaps I have shown my own prejudice and bias in alluding to it. Chapter 3 is about what is known as "argumentum ad hominem" fallacy or "getting personal" in an argument which Dr Whyte labels quite imperatively as: "Shut up!" Chapter 4 is a superb exposition of words used as smoke screens to say practically nothing of substance on a topic (politicians are good at this. Need I remind the reader that our author is an aspiring politician - see above!), and the writer gives us wonderful examples of this tendency even in academic circles. Chapter 5 treats of what he calls motive fallacy, a fallacy, he argues, that proceeds by ascribing certain motives to the opposition or to those with whom one is arguing - "they would say that, wouldn't they?" Other topics tackled are inconsistency, equivocation and begging the question. This book has an edge to it, almost too much so for any philosopher worth his/her salt as one can feel the righteous anger and indignation of the author behind the material, making it not quite as good and as balanced an introduction to critical and clear thinking as is Thinking from A to Z, (third edition) Nigel Warburton (2007), London: Routledge or Do you think what you think you think?: The Ultimate Philosophical Quiz Book, Julian Baggini & Jeremy Stangroom (2006), London: Granta. (Reviewed in my previous post HERE) Nonetheless, this book is a quick, entertaining and easy read for all its faults, and it will certainly make you think and raise obvious criticisms and objections at various junctures in the text. I will keep it on my shelves.
2. What Philosophers Think, ed. Julian Baggini & Jeremy Stangroom (2005), London: Continuum.
 |
| My copy of this book |
3. Philosophy Bites, David Edmonds & Nigel Warburton (2012), Oxford: OUP.
 |
| Warburton's and Edmonds' book! |
4. Think: A Compelling Introduction to Philosophy, Simon Blackburn (2001), Oxford: OUP.
 |
| A challenging little book! |
In short, this is a far more high-brow introduction to philosophy than the seven I have reviewed in these pages so far. Simon Blackburn is professor emeritus of philosophy at the University of Cambridge. He has written much academic material in his subject area over the years, e.g., Spreading the Word (1984), Essays in Quasi-Realism (1993) and Being Good (2011) among many others. He was also editor of the prestigious philosophical journal Mind from 1984 to 1990. He suggests in his introduction that philosophy asks the following types of questions: What am I? What is consciousness? Am I a puppet or have I free will? Why is there something rather than nothing? What is the difference between past and future? How can I be really sure that the world is at it seems to be? What is knowledge? What does it mean to know something? What are values and duties? What are rights? (pp. 2 -3) He stresses that it is humankind's capacity to be self-reflective that allows it to ask these questions. He further underlines the fact that philosophy is never about how much you know, but rather always about acquiring good thinking skills. (See p. 5) The headings of the various chapters in this thought-provoking and challenging book are: Knowledge, Mind, Free Will, The Self, God, Reasoning, The World and What to Do. All the chapters are gripping, stimulating and challenging - full of meaty questions. I found the chapter on "The Self" the most interesting, the most informative and the most challenging. In this chapter, Blackburn asks of us the question: "Who is the 'I' in the statement 'I am' or 'I love porridge.'? Is the self the same as the mind? Is it the same as the religious concept of soul? Is the self a mere "bundle of perceptions."? (John Hume.) Is the self simple or composite? (Thomas Reid.) Does the self endure over time? Am I the same person at 10 as I am at 30 or 50? Is the self an organizing principle? What about the story (joke) about the Irish axe that had been in the family for several generations, except that it had several new handles and several new heads? What about the case of the ship belonging to Thesius where eventually over time every single part of it had been replaced. Is this the same ship that our hero started out with? Simor Blackburn avers that "(t)hinking can help, but it is hard for it to destroy the illusions of the self." So we can see here where Blackburn stands on the reality of the self. Be that as it may, this present reviewer, who has spent some time in therapy, has of necessity been conscious of his being a human phenomenon, better know as the self, which he sought to get to know better and also to heal and inspire. It is very hard indeed to dispense with a notion of the self, then, either in therapy or in the workaday world of our own short existence. This book is for the more high brow reader, for that person who believes that there are big questions out there that must be addressed by humans if they wish to be content and satisfied in this world. Blackburn argues that we must attempt to answer these questions if we are to live a meaningful life. In brief, this is a sharp, well-reasoned, fair, comprehensive and at all times an incisive introduction to the engaging world of philosophy. It is at once stimulating and challenging and an important addition to any would-be philosopher's library.
Comments
Post a Comment