Table Of Content•
•
•
-
CONTENTS
6 Introduction
A QUARTO BOOK
ANCIENT
10
First edition for North America published in 2004
by Barron's Educational xries, Inc. 14 lhales of Miletos
15 Pythagoras of Samos
Copyright 2004 Quarto Inc.
CI
16 K'ung fu-zi (Confucius)
17 OVERVIEW: Chinese philosophy
AU rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by 18 Lao-zi (Lao-tzu)
photostat. microfilm, xerography, or any other means, or 19 Heraclitus of Ephesus
incorporated into any information retrieval system,
20 Parmenides of Elea
electronic or mechanical, without the written permission
21 leno of Elea
of the copyright owner.
22 Mo-zi (Mo-tzu)
All inquiries should be oddressed to: 23 Socrates
Barron's Educational Series, Inc.
24 Plato
250 Wireless Boulevard
26 Aristotle
Hauppauge, NY 11788
28 OVERVIEW: Human nature
29 Meng-zi (Mencius)
http://www.barronseduc.com
30 lena of Kition
International Standard Book Number 0-7641-2791-8
31 Epicurus of Samos
library of Congress Catalog Card Number 2003110643
32 Han Fei-zi
33 Wang Chong
QUAR.FPS
34 OVERVIEW: Skepticism
Conceived, designed, and produced by 35 Sextus Empiricus
Quarto Publishing pic
36 Nagarjuna
The Old Brewery
37 Plotinus
6 Blundell Street
38 Augustine of Hippo
london N7 9BH
40 OVERVIEW: Women in philosophy
Project Editor Paula McMahon 41 Hypatia
Senior Art Editor Penny Cobb
MEDIEVAL
Copy Editor Carol Baker 42
Designer Julie Francis
46 Boethius
Picture researcher Claudia Tate
47 Adi Sarhkara
Photographer Paul Forester
Illustrators Kuo Kang Chen, Coral Mula 48 AbO-'llisufya'qOb ibn IshOq al-Kindi
Proof reader Jo Fisher
49 John Scotus Erigena
Indexer Geraldine Beare
50 AbO Nasr Hamid Muhammad ibn al-Farakh
al-Rlrabi
Art Director Moira Clinch
52 AbO Ali ai-Hussain ibn Abdalldh ibn Sirn
Publisher Piers Spenct
54 Anselm of Canterbury
Manufactured by Universal Graphics, Singapore
56 OVERVIEW: Indion philosophy
Printed by Midas Printing International limited, China
57 Ramanuja
58 AbO Muhammed ibn Muhammed at-lusi
987654321
al-Gliazlr
59 OVERVIEW: Philosophy ond religion
60 Pierre Abelard
62 Ibn Rushd abu al-Wali'd Muhammad ibn 130 William James
Rushd
132 Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
64 Zhu Xi 133 Francis Herbert Bradley
66 Moses ben Maimon
134 Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob Frege
68 Roger Bacon
lWENTIETH CENTURY
70 Thomas Aquinas 136
72 William of Ockham 140 Edmund Gustav Albert Husser!
74 John Duns 5cotus 142 John Dewey
75 Nicolas Kryfts 144 Bertrand Arthur William Russell
76 Niccolo di Bernardo dei Machiavelli 146 Sir Allameh Muhammed Iqbal
77 Francisco Suarez 147 Sarvepal1i Radhakrishnan
148 ludwig Wittgenstein
EARLY MODERN
78
150 Martin Heidegger
82 Sir Francis Bacon 151 Rudolf Carnap
84 Thomas Hobbes 152 Feng You Ian (Fung Yu-Ian)
86 Marin Mersenne 153 Jean-Paul Sartre
87 Pierre Gassendi 154 Sir Karl Raimund Popper
88 Rene Descartes 156 Willard Van Orman Quine
90 Antoine Arnauld 158 Sir Alfred Jules Ayer
91 OVERVIEW: Mind and body 159 Richard Mervyn Hare
92 Wang fu-zi 160 Donald Herbert Davidson
93 Lady Anne Finch Conway 162 Sir Peter Frederick Strawson
94 Baruch Spinoza 164 Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe
96 John locke 165 John Bordley Rawls
98 Nicolas Malebranche 166 Thomas Samuel Kuhn
100 Gottfried Wilhelm leibniz 167 OVERVIEW: Philosophy of science
102 George Berkeley 168 Sir Michael Anthony Eardley Dummett
103 Anthony William Amo 170 Hilary Putnam
104 Baron de Montesquieu 172 OVERVIEW: African philosophy
106 OVERVIEW: Common sense 173 Kwasi Wiredu
107 Thomas Reid 174 David Wiggins
108 David Hume 175 Thomas Nagel
110 Jean-Jacques Rousseau 176 Saul Aaron Kripke
112 Immanuel Kant 178 David Kellogg lewis
114 Jeremy Bentham 180 Susan Haack
115 Mary Wollstonecraft 181 OVERVIEW: Moral philosophy
182 Peter Singer
NINETEENTH CENTURY
116
120 George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 184 Suggested reading
122 John Stuart Mill 186 Glossary
124 50ren Aabye Kierkegaarn 188 Index
126 Karl Heinrich Marx 192 Credits
128 The Honorable Victoria, lady Welby-Gregory
129 Charles Sanders Peirce
6
INTRODUCTION
empirical and the nonempirical: what we now think of as
the ph-r.;ical sciences gradually took on identities of their
The word "philosophy" comes from the Greek., meaning "love own, becoming ph-r.;ics. chemistry, and biology. Disciplines
of wisdom: As is usually the case with etymology, though, such as psychology and sociology split off later, often in a
that doesn't get us very far. Even leaving aside the tricky deliberate attempt to move them into the empirical,
question of what "wisdom" means, simply loving it doesn't scientific arena.
seem either very useful or much like what philosophers rart of the problem of defining philosophy, then, is that
actually do. Perhaps we could interpret it as meaning it's everything that's left-and unsurprisingly, it's impossible
something more: like the attempt to gain knowledge and to give a neat definition that includes and excludes
understanding. But how does philosophy differ from other everything that should be included and excluded. The best
human activities that have the same purpose? approach is to look at some examples of what goes on in
The question is complicated by the fact that the scope of philosophy. We can start by asking what the difference is
philosophy has changed over the centuries. For a very long between, for example, the philosophy of religion and the
time it induded almost every intellectual endeavor, from psychology or sociology of religion. The psychologist is
theology to physics. from psychology to logic. This lasted typically concerned with the role that religion and religious
until the end of the medieval period, when the situation practices and beliefs play in the individual psyche, as well
began to fragment The first split was between theology and as the role of psychological phenomena in the nature and
philosophy; though preceded by a number of writers who development of religion. Similarly, the sociologist is typically
had laid the groundwork, Descartes marks the beginning of concerned with the role of religion and religious practices
the new age. He makes use of the notion of god, and even in society, and with religions as social structures. Neither is
offers two arguments for god's existence, but he does so in concerned with the truth of religious claims, or with
the service of his attempt to provide secure foundations for whether religious beliefs and practices make sense; that's
human knowledge. The second split was between the the concern of philosophy.
This distinction sheds some light on the nature of
philosophy, but we need more detail. let's take a question
from the philosophy of religion. What, for example, is the
relationship between morality and god (or the gods)? In his
dialogue Euthyphro, Plato poses a problem to the believer
that has been debated by philosophers and theologians ever
sinct-a problem known as the Euthyphro dilemma: are
pious things pious because the gods love them, or do the
gods love them because they're pious? The same dilemma
can be raised for morality, in terms of monotheism: are
moral actions good because god commands them, or does
god command them because they're good?
A/~xond"o IS (Offrn d~sc"btd a~ fhe worla's tim grwt (Tnfrr of Iwrnong.
rhr lIbrary hOUlrd >wO,1Is by fhe grralt5t fhmktl'5 of thr oncirnt world. It
was ot Ihe lIbrary that Euclid di~covtrfillhe ,ults of gtomtlry, Ptoltmy
wratr rhr Almogtst, Erat051htnts mrasurM Iht diomtltr of tht forth, and
An:himrclrs mvtntrd tht scrrw· shofWd wort' pump Iholls still os~ lodoy.
Works by Plato, Socrott~, and many OfMI'5 we~ destroyrd by the ti~
which mzrcl 1110 thr ground,
INTRODUCTION 7
Throughout history. philosophy
h05 sought to 05S~5S ond ~)fploin
basic c:onr:tpts such os mom/ity
ond goo, rmd to ono~~ th~
rrlotiQllshlps ~Iw~n fh~m,
Neither horn of this
dilemma is very attractive
to the believer. If god's
commands create morality,
(this is known as Divine
Command Theory), then
he could have commanded 1- --
very differently-for
example, that murder is
good and charity evil-and our moral values would have the centuries. though the questions and approaches often
been reversed; if on the other hand, god commanded that have. These four fundamental areas are common to every
murder is evil because it is evil, then morality is independent philosophical tradition, though different traditions at
of god's will, so he hasn't created everything (and is subject different times have emphasized some and neglected others.
to morality Just like the rest of us). Responses indude
acct'pting or trying to minimize the problems associated Metaphysics is the hardest category to explain, partly
with one horn or the other, arguing for a combined because of the origins of the term. In the traditional
approach in which some moral values are created and some ordering of Aristotle's works. the Metaphysics was the
not, and rejecting the link between morality and god. book that came after the Physics to phusikd':
(~meto
We're not concerned here with what different religions ~after the Physics"); thus metaphysics concerned the topics
have said about what is moral and what isn't, nor with what dealt with in that book-primarily the nature of being,
they've said about god's commands, or his relationship with substance, causation, and the existence of god. Aristotle
mOrdlity. We're working at a hiqher level of abstraction, himself referred to such fundamental issues as First
examining the basic concepts of morality and god, and Philosophy. The main category of metaphysics is ontology;
analyzing and assessing their relationship. Philosophy is a this concerns the question of how many fundamentally
way of carrying out this sort of examination rigorously, distinct sorts of entity there are (material bodies, minds,
dispassionately, and disinterestedly. Just as science is a numbers, and so onl. Other metaphysical questions concern
determined effort to overcome human subjectivity in the the nature of causation, possibility and necessity, and the
investigation of the empirical aspects of the world, so nature of space and time.
philosophy is the effort to do the same thing in the The twentieth century saw a number of movements
investigation of the nonempirical. Its subject matter indudes hostile to metaphysics. such as logical positivism, though
our concepts. methods. and assumptions. so that philosophy they all make unexamined metaphysical assumptions (such
investigates not only its own distinctive subject matter, such as that everything that exists is observable). However,
as the nature of the mind and consciousness. morality, logic, writers such as Strawson, Kripke, and lewis have brought
and so on, but also other disciplines such as the sciences. metaphysics back into the mainstream philosophical arena.
Some people misuse the word "metaphysicar to refer
history, mathematics, and others.
to things like ghosts. magic. and the like; this makes little
THE MAIN DIVISIONS sense. ~Material substance" is as much a metaphysical
notion as "immaterial substance"; that everything that
Traditionally philosophy has been divided into a small
exists is physical is as much a metaphysical claim as that
number of core areas; this hasn't really changed much over
8 INTRODUCTION
ChriSlioun Huygens rmd Solomon Cost~r udmiring
Ih~ir first ~ndulum dock. S{'/~nct' 15 rootw in
philosophy: Ind~~d. mony phllo5ophefl engoged
m both philosophical arid SeienlifK mquiry 05
they}{)ughl ta eJl.plam Ihe world_ /I wu~ In fact,
Mrflrnne who suqg~st('(1 the use of 0 ~ndulum
0\ 0 liming devi(T 10 Huyg~ns.
related in such a way that to affirm the former
and deny the laHer is to contradict yourself. In
a valid inductive argument (one that moves
from a set of singular premises to a general
conclusion) this isn't the case, and exactly what
such arguments do is an important question
for the philosophy of science, epistemology,
and philosophical logic. A sound argument of
either type is a valid argument whose premises
are true. In formol (or mathematical or
symbolic) logic. whose first great propounder
was Frege (building on the work of the
there are nonphysical things such as minds. Indeed, the mathematicians George Boole and Augustus de Morgan),
concept of the world is itself a metaphysical concept, not logical structures are put in symboliC form, and the scope
a scientific one. of logic is much greater.
Philosophical logic (or the philosophy of logic) started as
Epistemology deals with the notions of knowledge and an investigation of the conctpt5., terms, and methods of
belief. The main questions concern the nature of knowledge logic, but expanded in scope during the twentieth century,
(how, for example. is it to be distinguished from mere true partly as a response to the developments in formal logic,
belief?), the possibility of knowledge in general, and the but partly to fill the gap left by the (temporary) discarding
possibility of specific kinds of knowledge (such as of metaphysics. A typical example of this is the question of
knowledge of the past, knowledge through the senses. or existence: in metaphysics one might ask whether existence
knowledge derrved from mductive reasonmg). is a genuine property, whereas in one
phil~phicallogic
•
One of the main disagreements has traditionally been would ask whether is a predicate.
~exists"
between what are called Rationalists and Empiricists. The
two extreme positions are that genuine knowledge (as Moral Philosophy is. for many nonphilosophers.
opposed to merely true beliefs) can come only through our philosophy's central concern-and, indeed, the
use of reason, not through the senses (plato in his investigation of the nature of morality and of how we
dialogues Meno and Republic provides an example of this should live our lives has been a key concern of philosophers
position), and that genuine knowledge can come only in all traditions. II has also, however, been seen as being
through our use of the senses (the logical positivists, such outside the core of phIlosophy, because il relies upon more
as the early Carnap and the early Ayer, come closest to fundamental theories in metaphysics and epistemology. The
this). In fact. most philosophers lie somewhere between two main divisions of moral philosophy {see Overview page
the two extremes. 181 for a more detailed account} are Metaethics and
Normative Ethics.
l ogic
is the science of valid reasoning and argument; it Metaethics dFals with the most basic questions of
concerns the relationships between propositions, ideas, or morality, such as whether moral values are objective,
beliefs. The first great logician was Aristotle. In a valid whether moral statements can be true or false, and the
deductive argument. the premises and the conclusion are relationship between morality and the concept of free will.
