A Clutch of Introductory Books to Philosophy: Brief Notes 1

(i) Philosophy: 100 Essential Thinkers: The Ideas that have shaped our World, Philip

Stokes (2012), London: Arcturus.

My copy of this book

In short, this is an excellent introductory text to the history of philosophy.  It makes the perfect present for any relative or friend who is beginning the subject either at the higher level of secondary education or first year in a university or college.  It locates every philosopher within his particular grouping or school and historical period from the Presocratics right up through the centuries to the Post-Modernists and what the author terms the New Scientists.  In this wonderfully clear book, Philip Stokes, a publisher and author of young adult fiction shows a considerable grasp of the whole gamut of Western Philosophy.  He also gives a pithy sentence  that summarizes the essence of each philosopher's thought just under the title of each chapter - no easy task that, to give us each philosopher's thought in a nutshell.  For instance for John Locke he offers us: "The mind is like a blank slate, waiting to be written on by the world of experience," (p. 143), for Jean-Paul Sartre: "It is up to the individual to choose the life they think best," (p. 278) and for Noam Chomsky: "The mind is very far from being a blank slate." (p. 333)

(ii) What's it all about? Julian Baggini (2004),London: Granta.

My copy of this book

While the title of the book suggests that a meaning to life will be offered within its pages, nothing could be further from the truth.  This book does something more: it literally does philosophy by teaching us how to clarify our questions and how to think in an ordered fashion.  It encourages us to ask clear questions and not to ask what I call "fuzzy" ones or what a teacher I once had called "woolly."  He often called some of us "woolly thinkers!" Baggini teaches his readers to be clear and precise thinkers who know what they are at. Unlike the London taxi driver who asked the great twentieth century philosopher Bertrand Russell what life was all about, we shall never fall into the trap of asking such vague questions that are so general as to be totally unclear.  I especially like the way Baggini describes his method of doing philosophy, viz., as "deflationary" (p.3) because it reduces the question to a more sharply focused one that cuts away the mythical, magical or mysterious clothing that obscures the naked truth of the question if I may indulge the reader with metaphor.  I also like his statement at the end of the introduction which declares: "Asking the right question is as important as giving the right answers." (p.4)  You will read of Kierkegaard, John Stuart Mill in the unlikely company of Monty Python and Funkadelic within these pages.  This book reads with the pace of a good gripping novel and is always entertaining as well as being very carefully and clearly reasoned.  Take and read, and learn to think and reason.

(iii) Thinking from A to Z, (third edition) Nigel Warburton (2007), London: Routledge.

My copy of Warburton's book

To use a rather utilitarian clause, this book does exactly "what it says on the tin." Philosophy is more a method or a way of thinking than it is a subject with a comprehensive range of ideas.  Therefore, clear thinking must, of necessity, lie at its heart.  No matter what you believe or what your ideas, even opinions, are, it is always better and more convincing when you can argue them logically and cogently.  From its beginnings, logic was always seen as central to philosophy.  Any book by Nigel Warnburton is always worth buying and I have several by him on my shelves, and I find that I pick one of them up from time to time just to refresh my mind with some of his sharp observations on life, on our ideas and predilections as human beings.  I am never disappointed.  Speaking of this wee book in the introduction, Warburton suggests several ways of using it, but probably the best way of using it is "to find an entry that interests you, then follow through the cross references; this will give you a sense of the interrelation of topics." (p. x) Let me start this short note by doing just that.  For instance, take the all too common fallacy of the "argumentum ad hominem," (literally arguing to the person) a trap that any philosophical neophyte can fall into all too readily. Another, simpler way, of stating this fallacy is to call it simply "getting personal," rather than sticking to the argument.  This type of fallacy works when the speaker shifts his/her attention from the point in question and starts to criticise or attack some non-relevant aspect of the person making the argument.  Now that I have read this entry that interests me, I can then follow the author's instruction by reading the cross references, all given in bold type, contained in this short entry.  Those references here are: ambiguity, getting personal, irrelevance, hypocrisy, inconsistency, contradiction.  Following the "getting personal" cross reference, one gets other interesting ones like rhetoric,, argument, vested interest and prejudice.  This is a fine reference book to have on your shelves and you will learn what  the terms "humptydumptying," "weasel words," "red herrings," and "straw man" all mean.  Happy hunting!

(iv) Do you think what you think you think?: The Ultimate Philosophical Quiz Book, Julian Baggini & Jeremy Stangroom (2006), London: Granta.

My copy of this Quiz Book

This interesting little book presents us with a dozen quizzes that attempt to reveal what the reader really thinks.  Now, this is where the somewhat contorted title comes in, as our findings may show us that this was not what we thought we actually thought in the first place.  It is a challenging and sometimes infuriating read, yet it is always fun.  As such it makes a wonderful introduction to philosophical themes and issues.  I have now done the first quiz twice, once when I first bought the book five or six years ago and now for this short review.  I have changed my view point on four out of the thirty questions.  That's good, I believe, as I have changed my opinion on some issues - a point which shows that I have grown in knowledge or wisdom.  Needless to say, another could argue that I have somewhat flexible opinions and don't really know what I believe at all in the first place.  The first quiz called "The Philosophical Health Check Quiz" is a very good starting point and well chosen as the first chapter as it shows the inconsistencies in the reader's thoughts and reasoning abilities. As such it is superbly enlightening.  None of the quizzes judges whether the reader's responses are right or wrong, and they merely highlight blatant inconsistencies.  I had thought I was a very consistent thinker, given my background in philosophy and mathematics, but I have learnt that I am less consistent a thinker than I had at first thought. However, I managed to reduce my tensions from four to two.  So, I'm still not 100% consistent in my thinking.  Other quizzes in this interesting little book include ones on logic, God/religious belief, taboo, ethics and freedom.  Most importantly, it is the analysis of the answers given that deepen the relevance of this highly interesting and stimulating book.  In short, it will teach the reader to think more consistently.  This book should be on every would-be philosopher's shelves.

The first clutch of books