btrwagner's review
3.0
Somewhat inspiring and intriguing - but also a bit arrogant and cryptic. If it's an introduction You are looking for - keep looking. But Scruton's elegant way of approaching philosophy is charming. I will re-read it again, once I get past my provocation.
nobodyatall's review
1.0
Should be called "an unquestioning guide to the bits of philosophy that confirm my beliefs and prejudices".
Frequently irritating book that takes sides (typically conservatively) and is more often dismissive of opposing arguments than discussing them. There are much better introductions available pitched at a similar level.
Frequently irritating book that takes sides (typically conservatively) and is more often dismissive of opposing arguments than discussing them. There are much better introductions available pitched at a similar level.
jennseeg's review
3.0
I didn't read the dust jacket carefully enough when selecting this book. I was hoping for more of a "guide" in terms of a descriptive, brief discussion of the field of philosophy. Instead, this is the author's application of philosophy to common life questions about morality, God, etc. Apparently, the author has written other books that are more introductory in nature and I probably should have started there. This book was well written, though, and generally interesting but I think some background information would have been helpful for me personally.
fredsphere's review against another edition
5.0
About 75% of this book was within my mental grasp after one reading, which is about where a work of philosophy ought to be. I felt challenged but not overwhelmed. I strongly recommend this book.
The following summary is my impressionistic take, and may be more influenced by my own interests and understanding than Scruton's intent. However, I'm pretty sure I'm right. Still, a disclaimer is needed: I'm in a little over my head here.
This is not really a historical survey of Western thought. Scruton focuses on what he sees as the big preoccupation of philosophy: the problem of subjectivity. Each of us experiences the world as an "I". We see a clear difference between ourselves and other material objects, yet the nature of this difference is a mystery. We infer the personhood of others and feel a powerful urge to connect with them, but our limited awareness imposes a barrier. How did an impersonal universe give rise to persons? Or is the personal some kind of mass delusion?
The most interesting of Scruton's conclusions (based, if I remember correctly, on Kant) is that the idea of an almighty, holy, personal God solves the dilemma of personhood in a way that nothing else can. Therefore, this idea is not some arbitrary "fairy tale" but rather an inevitable development.
This is not the same thing as showing the idea is true, as Scruton acknowledges. If the universe is fundamentally absurd, it might well lead us to insane conclusions. Still, as Scruton shows, Theism and its attendant virtues--holiness, honor, piety, humility, benevolence, joy, love--demand a kind of respect that some (but not all!) atheists fail to give, to their detriment.
This book adds to my motivation to grapple with Nietzsche, whose writings I've barely touched. His solution to the problem of self and its isolation was a radical embrace of the self's isolation (for the übermenschen able to pull it off). I could say more, but until I reread Scruton (or read Nietzsche) I'm afraid my description will be off-track.
I will be reading this book again; with any luck, I'm make revisiting it a regular event. Meanwhile--on to Nietzsche!
The following summary is my impressionistic take, and may be more influenced by my own interests and understanding than Scruton's intent. However, I'm pretty sure I'm right. Still, a disclaimer is needed: I'm in a little over my head here.
This is not really a historical survey of Western thought. Scruton focuses on what he sees as the big preoccupation of philosophy: the problem of subjectivity. Each of us experiences the world as an "I". We see a clear difference between ourselves and other material objects, yet the nature of this difference is a mystery. We infer the personhood of others and feel a powerful urge to connect with them, but our limited awareness imposes a barrier. How did an impersonal universe give rise to persons? Or is the personal some kind of mass delusion?
The most interesting of Scruton's conclusions (based, if I remember correctly, on Kant) is that the idea of an almighty, holy, personal God solves the dilemma of personhood in a way that nothing else can. Therefore, this idea is not some arbitrary "fairy tale" but rather an inevitable development.
This is not the same thing as showing the idea is true, as Scruton acknowledges. If the universe is fundamentally absurd, it might well lead us to insane conclusions. Still, as Scruton shows, Theism and its attendant virtues--holiness, honor, piety, humility, benevolence, joy, love--demand a kind of respect that some (but not all!) atheists fail to give, to their detriment.
This book adds to my motivation to grapple with Nietzsche, whose writings I've barely touched. His solution to the problem of self and its isolation was a radical embrace of the self's isolation (for the übermenschen able to pull it off). I could say more, but until I reread Scruton (or read Nietzsche) I'm afraid my description will be off-track.
I will be reading this book again; with any luck, I'm make revisiting it a regular event. Meanwhile--on to Nietzsche!
More...