Here is a summary of the key ideas in the extracts:
-
According to Socrates and Plato, the unexamined life is not worth living and truth resides in the world around us.
-
Philosophers such as Laozi, Siddhartha Gautama and Confucius emphasized living in harmony with nature, overcoming the ego and holding sincerity as a first principle.
-
Thales believed everything is made of water. Pythagoras proposed that number rules forms and ideas.
-
Epicurus argued that death is nothing to us. Diogenes advocated contentment with little. Zeno encouraged living in agreement with nature.
-
Key medieval ideas include: the soul is distinct from the body (Avicenna); God foresees our actions (Boethius); we can know God through reason (Anselm); philosophy and religion are compatible (Averroes).
-
Aquinas said the universe has not always existed. Cusanus said God is the not-other.
-
In the Renaissance, Montaigne said fame and tranquillity cannot coexist. Bacon promoted knowledge as power.
-
The Enlightenment saw key ideas from Voltaire (doubt), Hume (custom as guide), Rousseau (man born free), Smith (man as bargaining animal).
-
Revolution-era ideas include: man as machine (Hobbes); I think therefore I am (Descartes); imagination decides all (Pascal); God as cause of all (Spinoza); knowledge limited to experience (Locke).
-
19th-century thinkers explored: two kinds of truth (Leibniz); mind has no gender (Wollstonecraft); happiness for most (Bentham); theology as anthropology (Feuerbach); individual sovereignty (Mill); anxiety as freedom (Kierkegaard); class struggle (Marx).
-
Key modern ideas include: will to power (Nietzsche); what we do matters (James); life as series of collisions (Ortega y Gasset); limits of language are thought’s limits (Wittgenstein).
In summary, the extracts point to key ideas that have shaped Western philosophy regarding metaphysics, ethics, society, politics, knowledge, and the human condition. A major theme is humanity’s relationship with existence, knowledge and meaning.
that allows us to determine whether
perfectly logical arguments. Other
but because they realized that
- Philosophy seeks to explore fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, reason, and ethics through logical argument and discussion.
an argument is valid or not by
philosophers developed reasoning
beneath these concepts lay issues
- Early philosophers were driven by wonder about the natural world and sought rational rather than mythical explanations. They asked questions such as “What is the universe made of?” and “How do we acquire knowledge?”
applying certain principles. The
to solve specific problems; Aristotle,
deserving of philosophical analysis.
- Philosophical thinking relies on logical reasoning and debates ideas and arguments. Logic provides the tools for constructing valid arguments and ensuring beliefs have justification.
most influential system of logic was
for example, invented his syllogistic
Inevitably, these speculative ideas
- Metaphysics considers profound questions about existence, consciousness, free will, morality, and aesthetics. Epistemology examines what we can know and how we can know it.
devised by Aristotle. The principles
reasoning to determine the validity
led to reflections on human conduct
- Language and concepts shape how we think and understand the world. Analyzing language and conceptual frameworks is key to philosophy.
he established were refined over
of logical propositions.
and purpose. Questions arose such
- Ethics explores how we should live and what constitutes right and wrong. Different ethical theories provide frameworks for moral reasoning.
many centuries into the system that
Language itself has long been
as “How should we live?”; “What
- There are many branches of philosophy, including political philosophy, philosophy of science, philosophy of mind, and aesthetics.
today forms the basis for logical and
a philosophical subject of study.
makes for a just or virtuous life?”;
- Philosophy is an ongoing, open-ended enterprise. New ideas emerge through discussion and debate, challenging and building on what came before.
mathematical reasoning. However,
Philosophers recognize that
and “What are our moral duties to
some arguments that seemed
language shapes thought, and that
others?” This led to the branch of
logically sound were found to lead to
in analyzing the way we use and
philosophy called ethics, which is
false conclusions or contradictions.
understand various concepts and
concerned with right and wrong
expressions, we gain insight into
behavior and moral reasoning.
Language is the
assumptions and preconceptions
foundation of reason.
that would otherwise remain
Reason branches out
unexamined. Debates around the
From these initial preoccupations
meanings and proper usages of
with existence, knowledge,
words provoke philosophical
reasoning, and ethics, philosophy
analysis. Philosophers ask questions
has branched out into many other
such as “What is truth?” not simply
areas. As human knowledge and
to find a definition, but to uncover
society have become more complex,
the deeper issues that the concept
philosophers have turned their
embodies. The ideas we express
attention to more specific areas of
through language shape how we
study. Fields such as the philosophy
understand the world.
of science, philosophy of mind,
Johann Gottlieb Fichte
These paradoxes showed that logic is a tool that needs to be wielded with care and understanding.
The origins of ethics The discussions around metaphysics and epistemology inevitably led to questions about concepts that were fundamental to human thinking and purpose. Philosophers asked “What is
political philosophy, philosophy of art (aesthetics), and philosophy of religion have emerged. Yet all remain connected through
INTRODUCTION 15
their reliance on the kinds of
is informed by and depends upon
not just on recognizing and
Questions arise that the existing
fundamental reasoning that gave
what came before. New ideas are
contemplating great ideas—it
system hasn’t answered adequately.
rise to philosophy in the first place.
put forward and assessed, accepted
depends on participation. We all
What we accept as knowledge
or rejected, built upon or replaced,
have a part to play in exploring
can be challenged. Moral views
An ongoing enterprise
but always in reference to the
life’s mysteries and seeking to
that seemed unassailable prove
Philosophy is not a subject that
existing body of work that forms
expand human understanding.
to have counterarguments. For
progresses in a linear fashion,
the ongoing discourse of ideas
with each new theory replacing
that is philosophy.
Philosophy is collaborative rather
So philosophy continues as an
than competitive, cumulative
open-ended discussion that is as
the old. Although science builds
Philosophy belongs to
rather than striving to prevail over
much about exploring new lines of
on previous findings and aims
everyone. It is not the preserve
opposing arguments. Like science,
thought as it is about finding fixed
at a steady accumulation of
of academics in ivory towers;
its progress depends on each new
and final answers. There is always
knowledge, philosophy does not
generation assessing ideas
work toward definitive answers
afresh, questioning assumptions,
or an ultimate conclusion. Each
raising new objections or
philosopher’s vision is his own,
developing new perspectives.
although it is always in relation
Progress occurs through this
to the ideas of others. The subject
open and critical engagement
is open-ended and self-renewing.
with ideas, not by adhering
Each thinker’s contribution builds
rigidly to any particular system
on that of previous philosophers,
of thought. Philosophy depends
rather than aiming to replace it
And since no society can stand still, since all societies are involved in an endless process of change, philosophical systems cannot remain static. They must develop and grow or else philosophic thought will die.
Morris R. Cohen
with something entirely new.
Philosophy is about exploring the ideas and beliefs that shape our thought. Although there are perennial questions, philosophy progresses through successive generations engaging critically yet openly with these questions. Understanding the major branches of philosophy—metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, logic, and aesthetics—provides insight into humanity’s deepest concerns and a framework for thinking about life’s most profound mysteries. This book provides an overview of how philosophical thought has developed and the most influential thinkers and schools of philosophy. My hope is that it will inspire readers to contribute their own thinking to philosophy’s ongoing and open-ended discussion. Philosophy belongs to all of us.
Yet science also owes philosophy
their lines of reasoning, but also
a debt for ideas that shaped the
learn from how they construct
- Philosophy began as a way to analyze arguments and explore concepts, but developed into a field of study exploring how to live well, knowledge, beauty, society, and religion.
scientific theories of such figures as
these arguments. Reading the
Darwin, Newton, and Einstein. Many
originals does take time and effort
- Philosophy is closely connected to science and math. While logic seems precise, philosophy deals with ambiguous language. Philosophers clarify language and meanings.
philosophers have applied logical
though, so this guide is designed to
reasoning to scientific knowledge,
provide a quick introduction to the
- Philosophy examines individual lives (ethics), society (political philosophy), and religion. Eastern and Western philosophy differ in their relationships to religion and starting points.
and this philosophical analysis of
key ideas of the greatest thinkers.
science in turn feeds back into the
It gives you an insight into the roots
- Philosophical ideas form systems of thought with interconnections. Ideas come from analyzing others’ work. Philosophers’ views on knowledge lead to views on reality, ethics, society, and ideal lives.
development of scientific theory
of their philosophies and an
and methods.
understanding of how profoundly
- Philosophical ideas spread influence and some spawned scientific, political or artistic movements. Philosophy and science inform each other. Philosophers analyze science, influencing science.
Of course, philosophers can
their ideas have shaped the world.
- Philosophical ideas seem simple but end paradoxically. They call into question assumptions and make us think in new ways. Some were first of their kind. They still matter, though conclusions differ or were disproven.
Here is a summary of Thales’ reasoning and conclusions:
This Milesian philosopher was probably influenced by ancient Egyptian monism and Eastern mystical ideas, but he broke from traditional theocratic and mythological explanations of natural phenomena. Instead, Thales sought rational and naturalistic explanations based on observation and reasoning.
Thales proposed that the underlying substance of the world was water—all things arise from and return to water. He observed that water can transform into a solid (ice), a liquid (the sea), and a gas (vapor), so it seemed the logical choice as the primal substance. His hypothesis was an early example of the attempt to find unity in diversity.
Thales was also practically-minded. He is said to
Greece, who became increasingly interested in natural explanations of the world, directed their questions away from the gods and toward the workings of nature itself. Thales studied nature intensively and rationally explained many things, such as the flooding of the Nile River, without resorting to mythology. His proposed underlying substance, water, though an oversimplification, was a seminal example of early scientific reasoning.
Here is a summary of the key ideas associated with Pythagoras:
• Pythagoras believed that number is the underlying principle of the cosmos. The relationships between numbers are the basis of harmony and order in the universe.
• Pythagoras saw the cosmos as governed by harmonious pairs of opposites, such as light-dark, male-female, and odd-even. The union of opposites produces harmony.
• The Pythagoreans explored the relationships between numbers and geometry. They saw nature as shaped by archetypal geometric forms and proportions.
• Pythagoras believed in the transmigration of souls and in reincarnation until the soul reaches a state of purity. He taught strict moral and bodily discipline to facilitate this purification.
• The Pythagoreans were a religious brotherhood who followed a mystical way of life. They studied mathematics, music, astronomy, and philosophy as a path to wisdom and union with the divine.
• Key Pythagorean contributions include discoveries in mathematics, music, and astronomy. Their insights influenced later philosophers such as Plato. However, little is known about Pythagoras himself and many of the ideas attributed to him likely came from his followers.
• The Pythagorean belief in number as the essence of all things and in the harmony of the cosmos influenced Western thought for centuries. But their mystical approach was critiqued by rational philosophers such as Heraclitus.
• Key Pythagorean concepts include the harmony of the spheres, the tetractys (a triangular symbol), and the idea that “all is number.” But Pythagoras left no writings, so his teachings are hard to determine with certainty.
Does this help summarize the key ideas associated with Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans? Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in more detail.
• Pythagoras lived in ancient Greece in the 6th century BCE. Little is known about his life, but he founded a religious cult and philosophical school in Croton, southern Italy.
• Pythagoras was influenced by earlier Greek philosophers known as the Milesian School, who sought rational explanations for natural phenomena. Like them, Pythagoras approached philosophy and mathematics scientifically. However, he also held mystical and religious beliefs.
• Pythagoras believed that mathematics, especially geometry and the relationships between numbers, revealed the structure of the universe. He saw the cosmos as fundamentally mathematical and harmonious. His famous theorem showed that in a right-angled triangle, the square of the hypotenuse equals the sum of the squares of the other two sides.
• Pythagoras proposed that the same harmonic ratios that govern musical intervals also govern the stars, planets and chemical elements. This “music of the spheres” demonstrated the harmony in the cosmos. His ideas influenced later astronomy, mathematics and chemistry.
• Pythagoras advocated deductive reasoning, starting from axioms to reach new conclusions. This approach was refined by Euclid and influenced later philosophy. Pythagoras also believed that abstract thinking and reason were superior to sensory evidence, an idea developed by Plato.
• Pythagoras and his followers attributed mystical significance to numbers and geometric shapes. They saw numbers as the essence of all things, giving rise to the dimensions of the physical world. Though bizarre by today’s standards, these ideas demonstrated the Pythagoreans’ belief in the power of mathematics.
• Pythagoras’s ideas have had a profound and lasting influence on Western thought, though his life remains largely shrouded in mystery. His thought represents an early attempt to combine rationalism and mysticism.
Here is a summary of Siddhartha Gautama and Buddhism:
-
Siddhartha Gautama, later known as the Buddha, lived in India in the 6th century BCE. He was born into a life of luxury but was dissatisfied and left his privileged life to find spiritual enlightenment.
-
After trying extremes of sensual indulgence and asceticism, Gautama found the “middle way” - a balanced path that led to enlightenment. He gained enlightenment while meditating under a bodhi tree.
-
Gautama taught that suffering is universal and caused by desire and attachment. One can end suffering by freeing oneself from desire and ego. The “not-self” refers to the idea that there is no permanent self or soul. All things are impermanent and interdependent.
-
Gautama’s teachings are summarized in the Four Noble Truths: 1) Suffering exists; 2) Suffering is caused by desire; 3) Suffering can end; 4) The Eightfold Path can end suffering. The Eightfold Path is a practical guide to enlightenment and an ethical way of living.
-
The ultimate goal in Buddhism is Nirvana - release from suffering and the cycle of rebirth. Nirvana is a state of enlightenment and oneness with the eternal “not-self”.
-
Gautama’s teachings spread throughout India and Asia, eventually being written down 400 years after his death. Different schools of Buddhism evolved in different regions. Buddhism had little influence on Western philosophy until the 20th century.
-
Gautama’s philosophy emphasizes reasoning and experience. He taught that one can achieve enlightenment through one’s own efforts, not through divine grace. However, Gautama is revered as the Buddha - the enlightened one.
That covers the basic ideas in Siddhartha Gautama’s life, teachings, and the development of Buddhism. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
Confucius taught an ethical system based on traditional Chinese values such as loyalty, filial piety, ritual propriety, and reciprocity. He believed virtue and moral authority were achieved through merit and cultivated behavior, not inherited or god-given. The main source of Confucius’ teachings is the Analects, a collection of his sayings compiled by disciples. In it, he argues that leaders should rule with benevolence and by virtuous example. Individuals should know their place in a hierarchy of relationships - as ruler-subject, parent-child, husband-wife, elder-younger - and observe the proper ritual proprieties. Sincerity is key. By performing rituals with sincerity, virtue becomes visible to others. Individuals are transformed, and society improved.
afford a fee. His most famous
dictatorship of relativism.”
pickings to be made. The law courts
doctrine is that “man is the
were busy, but anyone who was
measure of all things”, meaning
Protagoras came to Athens from Thrace. He was one of the first professional philosophers (known as “Sophists”) who taught rhetoric and practical subjects for money.
Protagoras argued for relativism - the idea that knowledge and truth depend on perspective. He believed that contradictory perspectives could both be true depending on the viewpoints of those holding them.
His most famous statement is “Man is the measure of all things” - meaning that humanity is the source of all value judgments about what is true or good. Truth and morality are relative and depend on individual and cultural beliefs.
Protagoras challenged the notion of absolute and universal truths. His relativism and subjectivism were opposed to the absolutism of philosophers like Parmenides. Protagoras emphasized practical “skills” like rhetoric over abstract reasoning. He reflected the secularism and individualism that were emerging in Athenian democracy.
Here is a summary of key points about Socrates:
• Socrates wrote nothing himself, but his method of questioning and reasoning, known as the dialectical method, influenced subsequent Western philosophy.
• He persistently asked questions about ethics and morality in order to examine commonly held beliefs and determine the truth.
• He believed that “the unexamined life is not worth living” and that we must reason for ourselves to gain knowledge and wisdom.
• He believed in absolute moral truths that could be determined through reasoning. He rejected moral relativism.
• He was convicted for corrupting the youth of Athens and sentenced to death. His student Plato portrays him as a martyr for philosophy in his Apology.
• Although Socrates proposed no theories himself, his method of questioning and reasoning, and his belief in absolute moral truths, influenced subsequent philosophers like Plato and Aristotle.
• He believed that the only life worth living is a good and virtuous life, achieved through reasoning and knowledge. Virtue is the highest aim of human existence.
• He saw philosophy as a means to gain self-knowledge and become a better person. The quest for truth and virtue was his guiding motivation.
• He believed the soul or psyche is the true self, not the physical body. The soul can be purified through philosophy.
• He believed we can come to objective moral knowledge through a process of questioning commonly held beliefs and opinions. True knowledge comes from within, not from the senses.
Does this summary accurately reflect Socrates and his philosophical views? Let me know if you would like me to clarify or expand on any part of the summary.
Here is a summary of Plato’s theory of knowledge:
• Plato believed that knowledge is not gained through the senses, but through reason. True knowledge comes from innate ideas that exist in the mind.
• There is an immaterial realm of Ideas, or Forms, that represent perfect archetypes of the objects and concepts in the material world. These Ideas provide the patterns for the imperfect objects we perceive with our senses.
• We are born with a basic knowledge of the Ideas, which allows us to recognize the material world. When we see an object, like a dog, we recognize it because we have a concept of the archetypal “Idea of Dog” in our mind.
• The material world is an imperfect shadow of the world of Ideas. Objects are in a constant state of change, but the Ideas are eternal and unchanging. True knowledge comes from understanding the Ideas, not the material world.
• Reason allows us to recollect our knowledge of the Ideas. Dialectic, the process of philosophical debate and logical argument, helps in recollecting the Ideas.
• Plato believed the world of Ideas provides the only true reality, while the material world is illusory and deceiving. True philosophers aim to understand the world of Ideas, not the shadows of the material world.
• Plato founded his Academy to teach philosophy and enable others to discover the nature of the Ideas through dialogue and reason. His works, including The Republic and Symposium, explore his theory of knowledge and other philosophical concepts.
That covers the essence of Plato’s theory of knowledge, including his concepts of the Forms, innate ideas, the difference between the world of Ideas and the material world, and the methods for gaining true knowledge. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
• Primarily, Plato’s concerns were similar to those of his mentor, Socrates: to search for definitions of abstract moral values and refute relativism.
• In the Republic, Plato described his vision of an ideal just society and explored virtue. But he also discussed knowledge, reality, and politics.
• Plato argued that to understand virtue or any concept, we must first grasp its essence or “Form”. There are ideal Forms of everything, like perfect triangles, that exist in a transcendent realm of Ideas.
• We can only access this realm through reason, not our senses. The material world is an imperfect reflection of the world of Ideas.
• Plato argued that we innately know the Forms, though we may not realize it. Our immortal souls perceived the Forms before birth. Learning is recollection.
• Philosophers, who comprehend the Forms, should rule in Plato’s ideal society. But most people focus on the material world, like prisoners seeing only shadows in Plato’s allegory of the cave.
• Plato profoundly influenced Western thought. His theory of Forms and focus on reason and knowledge shaped rationalism and idealism. Though Aristotle disagreed with him, Plato inspired generations of thinkers.
• Aristotle studied under Plato at the Academy in Athens, but disagreed with Plato’s theory of Forms.
• Unlike Plato, Aristotle believed that universal truths could be found in the natural world, not in an abstract realm. He thought we gain knowledge through experience and observing the world around us.
• Aristotle studied the natural sciences, especially biology. He collected and classified specimens, creating the first comprehensive system of biological taxonomy.
• Aristotle’s classification system was hierarchical, dividing the natural world into living vs. nonliving things, then plants vs. animals. He believed we recognize these differences through the shared characteristics of each category.
• Aristotle applied the same approach to abstract concepts like virtue, justice, and goodness. He thought we have no innate ideas and gain knowledge of universals through experience.
• Aristotle’s empiricist epistemology influenced later philosophers like Locke, Berkeley, and Hume. His approach differed from the rationalism of philosophers like Descartes, Leibniz, and Kant.
• Aristotle made significant contributions to many fields of knowledge, including physics, logic, metaphysics, ethics, politics, and poetics, in addition to biology. His works shaped the development of these disciplines.
Nicomachus, the court physician
philosophical school in a
to the Macedonian royal family.
gymnasium. According to legend
- Aristotle’s approach was empirical and logical. He observed the world, classified natural
Aristotle was a student of Plato at
he lectured while walking with
phenomena, and used reasoning and logical syllogisms.
Plato’s Academy, remaining there
his students—“Peripatetics”
- He rejected Plato’s theory of Forms, instead focusing on the characteristics and purposes of
for 20 years. In 341 BCE he left
meaning “walkers about”).
existing things. He believed we can understand universal concepts like justice by observing
Athens to tutor Alexander, son of
Their range of subjects was
King Philip II of Macedon. After
encyclopaedic—physics, biology,
- Aristotle pioneered the study of biology and classified animals based on their characteristics.
Philip’s death he returned to
ethics, politics, rhetoric,
He proposed four causes to explain change in nature: material, formal, efficient, and final.
Athens and founded his own school.
metaphysics, logic, and more.
how they manifest in the world.
- Aristotle’s logic and model of deductive reasoning with syllogisms was influential for centuries.
Aristotle died in 322 BCE, aged 62.
-
His philosophy and science dominated Western thought for centuries but declined after his death. His works were preserved and spread through the Islamic world, influencing scholars like Avicenna. In Europe, his works were reintroduced in the Middle Ages and influenced thinkers like Thomas Aquinas. His thought shaped fields from logic to biology to ethics.
and Seneca the Younger writes
• Zeno of Citium founded the philosophical school of Stoicism.
benefits whenever they appear, he
about Stoic ethics.
• He was influenced by the Cynic Diogenes, who advocated an ascetic life lived
must accept whatever it brings. As a
in accord with nature. • Zeno believed that the cosmos was governed by the laws of a “supreme
consequence, the goal of life is to
lawgiver” and that humans have no power to change this.
live in harmony with nature by being completely rational, maintain self-
• According to Zeno, a good life meant living in harmony with nature by being rational, self-controlled, and indifferent to pleasure or pain, poverty or riches. • Stoicism appealed widely in ancient Greece and Rome, influencing ethics and politics.
Key works
Posts (a collection of short
sayings), now lost but recorded by later Stoic writers.
68
DON’T ASK FOR
WHAT IS PLEASES
YOU, ASK FOR
WHAT BENEFITS
YOU
EPICTETUS (C.50/55–C.135 CE)
IN CONTEXT
BRANCH
Stoicism, established
APPROACH
by Zeno of Citium in the
• Desire and aversion are the main causes of unhappiness; both are the result of “false judgments” that lead us to want what is not
3rd century BCE, endured
Stoicism
for nearly 500 years. It found
BEFORE
strong, lasting expression in the
c.300 BCE Zeno of Citium
within our control and dislike what is inevitable.
work of Epictetus. Though he
founds Stoicism, advocating
wrote no books, his teachings
indifference to pleasure and
were preserved by his pupil
pain, and life in accord with
• The only things that are within our control are our opinions, judgments, choices, and actions. All else lies outside of our control in what Epictetus
Arrian in The Discourses and the
nature and reason.
calls the “external sphere”—our bodies, property, reputation, and relationships.
Enchiridion (Handbook).
• The key to happiness is recognizing what is and is not within our control, and accepting what is out of our hands. Desire and aversion should be
Epictetus was born a slave, but
c.40–45 CE The Roman
attained his freedom in Rome,
statesman Seneca expounds
limited only to what is under our control—our choices and judgments. Everything else should be met with indifference.
possibly thanks to his Stoic
Stoic principles.
education. He was sent into exile
• Our actions should be guided by virtue—courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom. Virtue is the only true good; all else is indifferent.
in 93 CE and lived in Nicopolis in
AFTER
northwestern Greece, where he
c.160 CE The Stoic
founded his own school.
philosopher Marcus
• Freedom and happiness lie in understanding what we can control, and not worrying about what we cannot. We should aim not for what pleases us, but
Aurelius’s Meditations
for what benefits us and accords with nature and reason. This is achieved through wisdom, judgment, self-discipline, and virtuous action.
Epictetus taught that through
expresses key Stoic ideas.
philosophy, individuals could attain inner peace by living
Key works
according to Stoic principles. His
The Discourses,
main ideas include:
Enchiridion (The Handbook)
Augustine believes that God did not create evil, because evil is simply the absence of good. God created the world and everything in it, including rational beings such as humans.
earthquakes, and other disasters
To be rational, humans must have free will, which means the ability to choose good or evil.
As for moral evils, Augustine argues
“natural evils” assumes that they
God gave humans free will, so they can act well or badly. This is why God left open the possibility of
that they occur because of the
are unavoidable and parts of the
Adam choosing evil in the Garden of Eden.
abuse of free will. God created the
natural order, like evil arising from
first humans with a capacity for
human choices. But God as creator
Augustine argued that God allows evil to exist so that the good can be better appreciated, just
goodness, but they chose evil
of that order is still responsible
as shadows or dark patches can enhance a painting or harmony in music. Augustine believed
instead. Although God foresaw that
for allowing them. Again, there
this was the best of all possible worlds that included free, rational beings. His explanation is
they would make this choice, he
are answers, but none wholly
meant to solve the problem of how an all-powerful, all-good God can exist when there is evil
still created them, because even
satisfactory. Augustine’s approach
a world with moral evil in it,
remains the starting point for
in the world.
allowing rational creatures the
most Christian philosophers, but
So, in summary, Augustine argued:
freedom to choose evil, was better
the problems it addresses remain
than a world with no moral evil but
deep and complex. ■
• Evil is the absence of good, not a thing in itself. God did not create evil.
also no free, rational creatures.
• God gave humans free will, which allows for the possibility of evil. This is better than a world with no free, rational beings. • God allows evil to exist so that good can be better appreciated. This is the best possible world that includes free, rational beings. • Augustine’s explanation aims to solve the problem of evil for Christians who believe in an all-powerful, all-good God.
Augustine also suggests that a world containing a mixture of good and evil is a more perfect creation than one containing only good. The good, he argues, is enhanced and made more lovely by contrast with its opposite. A world with some evil in it may be the best that
Here is a summary of key points from the passage:
-
Avicenna was a Persian philosopher who lived from 980 to 1037 CE.
-
He was heavily influenced by Aristotle and saw himself as an Aristotelian philosopher. However, he adapted and synthesized Aristotle’s ideas in his own philosophy.
-
Avicenna argued for mind-body dualism, the view that the mind and the body are separate substances. He gave several arguments for this view, including that we would still be aware of our self even if we were sense-deprived and unaware of our body.
-
Avicenna’s dualism was a departure from Aristotle, who saw the mind as the “form” of the body. Avicenna believed the soul could survive after the death of the body, unlike Aristotle.
-
Avicenna was a polymath who also made significant contributions to medicine. He lived his life in service of various rulers, working as both a physician and political advisor.
-
Avicenna helped establish the canon of Greek-inspired philosophy in the Islamic world that would influence later philosophers in Europe. He is considered one of the most important philosophers in the Arabic tradition and in the history of philosophy in general.
Here is a summary of Anselm’s Ontological Argument:
-
Even a fool understands the definition of “God” as the greatest being that can be conceived.
-
God exists in the mind (as an idea).
-
If God exists only in the mind but not in reality, then we can conceive of a greater being (one that exists in the mind and in reality).
-
But we cannot conceive of a being greater than the greatest being that can be conceived (God).
-
Therefore, God must exist in reality as well as in the mind. God’s existence is necessary by definition.
-
If God exists only in the mind, then God would not be the greatest conceivable being. But God, by definition, is the greatest conceivable being.
-
Therefore, God must exist in reality. God’s existence is logically necessary.
The key premises of the argument are: 1) We have an idea of the greatest conceivable being (God); and 2) Existence is greater than non-existence. Therefore, the idea of God must necessarily include his existence, otherwise God would not be the greatest conceivable being. God’s essence implies his existence.
The argument is ingenious but controversial. Objections include: 1) Existence is not a predicate (or property) in the way required for the argument. 2) We cannot define things into existence. 3) The argument seems to depend on a subjective standard of greatness. 4) The argument seems to conflate imagination and reality.
Nonetheless, the Ontological Argument remains a topic of serious discussion in philosophy and theology. At the very least, it shows that the question of God’s existence can be approached rationally and philosophically.
-
Averroes was an Islamic scholar who tried to reconcile philosophy and religion. He believed the Qur’an contained poetic truths that required interpretation by the educated elite.
-
Averroes accepted many of Aristotle’s teachings and wrote commentaries on Aristotle’s works. Averroes believed humankind was immortal through a shared intellect, though individual humans perished with their bodies.
-
Averroes’s work influenced later Jewish and Christian scholars known as Averroists, who accepted contradicting philosophic and religious truths.
-
Moses Maimonides was a Jewish philosopher who wrote about Jewish law and Aristotle. He tried to avoid anthropomorphizing God.
-
Maimonides developed a strand of negative theology, claiming God has no attributes. We cannot describe God as “good” or “powerful.” God transcends such descriptions.
• The question of whether the universe has always existed or began at some point has long divided opinion.
• In the medieval period, Aquinas argued for a middle path. He accepted Aristotle’s view that the universe could not have begun from nothing. However, he believed that God created the universe, so it must have had a beginning.
• To resolve this, Aquinas said that God created the universe with an “eternal law of becoming.” The universe is constantly changing and being created by God at every moment. In this way, it has no beginning but is not eternal either.
• Aquinas’ view allowed him to reconcile Christian belief in God as creator with Aristotelian philosophy. It proposed a model of continuous creation that avoided the seeming contradiction of the universe having a beginning yet always existing.
• Aquinas’ approach illustrates how medieval thinkers sought to integrate faith and reason through philosophical argument. His views influenced much subsequent Christian theology.
That covers the key elements around Aquinas’ argument, his influences, his reconciliation of philosophy and theology, and his lasting impact. Please let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
this is a gift of the Holy Spirit and
gain knowledge in two ways:
Aquinas also believes we possess
Christian doctrine represents divine
through the senses, and through
“intuitive knowledge”, which comes
truth. Aquinas insists that there
the intellect. The senses give us
to us directly from God and does not
can be no ultimate contradiction
direct knowledge of particular,
depend on reasoning. In Aquinas’s
between faith and reason.
individual things, such as sights,
view, the knowledge that God exists,
It is easy to see how difficult a
sounds, smells, tastes, and textures.
and that we have an immortal soul,
position this was to sustain. It
But through the intellect, we are
comes to us through this intuitive
involved accepting doctrines such
able to grasp the general nature
knowledge—although once we have
as the belief in life after death and
of things, such as the different
it, we can also reason about these
the immortality of the human
94 THOMAS AQUINAS
truths and show that they are not
reason cannot exist without a body.
of the soul in a living body, then it
logically incoherent. Nevertheless,
The human mind is the “form”
cannot exist without a body at all: it
our knowledge of them depends
of the matter that makes up the
will perish when the body perishes.
in the first place on this direct
physical body. The mind is what
Aquinas thinks this is a mistake.
intuitive insight, which comes from
gives shape and order to the lump
He claims that although the
God. Science and philosophy can
of matter that is a human body,
mind is indeed the form of the
never prove or disprove truths that
and allows it to function as a living,
body, this only means that for
come to us through intuitive faith.
conscious being. Without the mind,
a human being to be alive, mind
the matter that makes up the body
and body must be united. It does
would just be a jumble of elements.
not mean that the mind cannot
Body and mind
The other crucial aspect of
exist without the body. The mind
Aquinas’s thought is his view of the
Aquinas thinks that mind and body
is immaterial and spiritual; it is not
relation between mind and body.
are united in a living human being,
made up of physical elements itself.
He rejects the dualism proposed
but that the mind can exist without
It needs to be united to a physical
by Platonists, who say that mind
the body. Some philosophers, says
body in order for a person to live
and body are separate substances.
Aquinas, make the mistake of
and think and act—just as form
He also rejects the materialism
assuming that if the mind cannot
needs to be united to matter for
proposed by some Aristotelians, who
perform its functions in the absence
anything to exist in the physical
say that mind is simply part of the
world. But the mind itself remains
physical structure of the body, and
immaterial, even when separated
that there can be no mind without
from the body, as happens at death.
a body. Aquinas holds an
Thus for Aquinas, the belief in an
intermediate position.
afterlife and the immortality of
He agrees with the Aristotelians
the soul can be reconciled with
that the human mind functions only
the fact that in this life, mind and
when united with a body; without
body are intimately united. The
bodily senses and the brain, the
mind is the immaterial form of the
mind would have nothing to work
body, not part of its physical make-
on and could not operate. However,
up; but the body provides the mind
he disagrees that this means the
with the matter it requires in order
mind cannot exist without a body.
to function and to express itself in
His view has sometimes been called “moderate realism”. He
Averroes and some other Aristotelians
claims that universal concepts,
believed that humans share a single
such as “humanity”, have some
collective mind. Aquinas disagreed,
kind of reality beyond the mind.
arguing that every individual human
But they are not independent
possesses their own immaterial mind
substances, as Platonists claim.
or soul. Our minds give shape and order
Rather, they exist as the shared
to our physical bodies, allowing us to live
essence of individual things—the
and think, but the mind itself survives
underlying nature that makes a thing
death, according to Aquinas.
the kind of thing it is. The concepts
are in the mind, but refer to
something real in the world. The philosophers who say that the
the living human being.
THE MEDIEVAL WORLD 95
Here is a summary of Nikolaus von Kues’ view of God:
-
Von Kues believes we can gain knowledge about God through reason. By defining the nature of all things, we can deduce what God must be like.
-
God cannot be comprehended by the human mind. Whatever we know or can conceive is not God. God is “beyond apprehension.”
-
God is before all things—not in time, but ontologically. All things exist through God, not after God.
-
God is not a “thing” and has no substance. God is what comes before even the possibility of anything existing.
-
For this reason, von Kues describes God as “Not-other”—beyond being and non-being. God transcends all concepts and definitions.
-
Although incomprehensible, God is the source of all reason, knowledge, and existence. Like Plato’s “Good” or “One,” God is the ultimate first principle.
-
Von Kues builds on ideas from Plato, Dionysius the Areopagite, and other Christian Platonists in developing his view of God as “Not-other.” His thinking points toward later apophatic theology.
-
Apophatic theology is the attempt to describe God by negation—by saying what God is not—rather than by positive assertions. For von Kues, God transcends even being and non-being.
So in summary, von Kues portrays God as ineffable, incomprehensible, and transcendent—yet the source of all that exists. By stripping away all limitations and conceptualizations, he points to the mysterious ground of being itself.
Here is a summary —then annexed Florence in 1406, and writing, which he hoped would
of Machiavelli’s key ideas:
some historical context about
Florence did not regain independence impress the new Medici rule.
Machiavelli and Florence.
until 1434. The Medici family took
The Republic explored different
control as unofficial rulers in 1434. In types of government in Florence’s
• The success and security of the state is the highest priority.
Machiavelli was born in Florence, 1512, the Medici were overthrown,
history, concluding that a republic
Italy, during a time of political
and Florence became a republic.
was the best option. However,
upheaval. Florence had been ruled
Machiavelli served as a civil servant
by the Medici family, but in 1494
under the new republic.
• Leaders should aim for the glory and success of the state above all
in The Prince (published
else, not their own glory.
posthumously in 1532),
they were overthrown, and the
Machiavelli set out his views on
republic of Florence was established. In 1512 the Medici regained controlhow an ideal leader—a “prince”
of Florence and had Machiavelli
in the broadest sense—should
means, even those that violate
While Florence was a republic, Machiavelli was a senior official. When imprisoned and tortured for conspiring act to acquire and maintain
moral rules, to achieve their ends.
the Medici regained control, Machiavelli against the Medici. Released in
1513, he retired to his estate,
was accused of conspiracy, imprisoned, where he wrote The Prince.
power. He took a bluntly pragmatic and amoral stance, arguing that “the ends justify the means”. Rulers, he
• Leaders should use whatever
• The health and security of the state depends on a strong leader.
said, should let necessity, not morality,
we know Machiavelli was educated,
but not published until after his
Machiavelli lived during a turbulent time in Florentine politics. In 1494, King Charles II of France invaded
well-read in Latin classics, and
death. Machiavelli died in 1527.
Italy and overthrew the Medici family rule of Florence. The city became a republic for 18 years. During this
fascinated by politics.
Niccolò Machiavelli is best
time, Machiavelli worked as a diplomat and gained experience in political affairs.
After the fall of the Medicis,
known for his political treatise
Machiavelli worked for the republic
The Prince, published in 1532.
In 1512, the Medicis regained control of Florence. Machiavelli lost his position and was exiled. To try and
for 18 years in a series of official
Though its cynical and ruthless
regain favour, he wrote The Prince in 1513, dedicating it to Lorenzo de Medici. The book advised rulers
posts, including Secretary of the
advice shocked many of his
how to gain and maintain power. It advocated that the ends justify the means, that it is better for a ruler to be feared than loved, and that ruthlessness is necessary.
Second Chancery, the body
contemporaries, it has endured
responsible for Florence’s internal
as a classic study of power
and external diplomatic affairs.
politics. Machiavelli is seen as
Machiavelli believed republics were the ideal form of government, as seen in his work Discourses on Livy.
After the Medici return, his life
a pivotal figure who helped move
However, he recognized that princedoms were sometimes necessary. The Prince may represent his views
descended into relative poverty,
political philosophy away from
on how princes should rule in such cases. However, its contents should be treated cautiously, as Machiavelli
relieved only occasionally by such
the idealism of Plato and Aristotle
may have written what he thought the Medici rulers wanted to hear in order to regain their favour.
activities as playwriting, as well
toward political realism.
After Francis Bacon inherited his estate in 1596, he devoted himself to philosophy and the advancement of learning. In 1620,
and rebellion. Imprisoned
and religion deal with completely
Bacon proposes that scientists
and fined, he was banished
separate spheres: science aims
should put aside received wisdom
from public life, though later
to understand the operations of
and prejudices, and instead collect
pardoned by King James I.
nature in this world, while religion
data through observation and
is concerned with spiritual matters
controlled experiments. The data
Key works
and life after death. To gain true
is then analyzed inductively to
1605 The Advancement
knowledge, Bacon argues, we must
form hypotheses and theories.
of Learning
free our minds from prejudices
These theories then suggest new
1620 Novum Organum
and preconceived ideas, which
experiments that can test them,
1623 The New Atlantis
he calls “idols”. He identifies four
ultimately leading to scientific laws.
such “idols”: the “idols of the tribe”,
This inductive and experimental
1627 New Experiments
our natural human tendency to see
approach, argues Bacon, will enable
what we expect to see; the “idols
scientific knowledge to advance
of the cave”, which arise from our
steadily and cumulatively. ■
Bacon published his main philosophical work, the Novum Organum. This proposed a new system of logic based on experimental science and induction, rather than deduction. Bacon believed that scientific knowledge builds upon itself, enabling new discoveries and inventions. He saw knowledge as power, giving humanity mastery over nature.
‘e retreated from public life after
1621 accused of bribery
112
THE END
JUSTIFIES
THE MEANS
THOMAS HOBBES (1588–1679)
IN CONTEXT BRANCH Political philosophy
Consequentialism is the moral philosophy that judges actions by their outcomes or consequences rather than by the acts themselves. It is sometimes summarized in the phrase “the end justifies the means”.
Thomas Hobbes’ political philosophy proposes a system that aims
APPROACH
for an end—namely, civil peace—even if the means adopted seem
Consequentialism
harsh. In a time of violent political and religious conflicts, Hobbes
BEFORE
argued for an absolute sovereign to keep the peace.
5th century BCE Sophists argue
Hobbes was born shortly before the outbreak of the English Civil
that the rightness of actions depends on circumstances
War in 1642. He studied at Oxford University but left without
and cultural conventions.
graduating. In the 1640s, as the civil war raged, he went into self-
4th century BCE Plato, in
imposed exile in France, where he wrote his best-known work,
The Republic, argues that justice Leviathan, published in 1651. is defined by the harmonious
AFTER
working of society.
Hobbes starts from the proposition that humans are essentially
The end justifies the means
18th century Jeremy Bentham
self-interested. In a hypothetical “state of nature” without government,
advocates utilitarianism:
life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” because people will
actions that produce the
the most good for the most
always put their own interests first. To escape this miserable condition,
people are morally right.
individuals come together in a social contract, establishing a sovereign—
1987 In A Theory of Justice,
an absolute ruler or ruling body—to govern them and keep the peace.
philosopher John Rawls
proposes a theory of justice
Hobbes argues that the sovereign has to have absolute power to fulfill
based on principles people
this role. While some of the sovereign’s acts may seem harsh, the
would choose behind a “veil
ends—peace and order—justify the means. Individuals give up their
of ignorance”.
rights to the sovereign, who then has the authority to do whatever is necessary to maintain civil order and security.
RENAISSANCE AND THE AGE OF REASON 113
See also: Plato 68–73 ■ Jeremy Bentham 134–37 ■ John Rawls 258–61
Hobbes claims that in a state of nature, life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. His Leviathan proposes an absolute sovereign to impose order.
The “state of nature” is a
The Leviathan answered
hypothetical condition of humanity
supporters of parliament who had
Arguments against
before the formation of civil society.
just executed Charles I, arguing that
For Hobbes, it represents a state of
even the tyranny of a king is preferable
• Hobbes’ social contract depends on hypothetical individuals
perpetual war, where life has no arts,
to the war of all against all. Many saw
in an imagined state of nature, not actual people in society.
letters, or society, and is at constant
Leviathan as a defense of despotism.
• People do not necessarily act only out of self-interest—they
risk of violent death. To escape this
Hobbes contested this view, arguing
can show altruism and work together voluntarily.
state, people join in a social contract,
that his theory aims to make the
• Absolute power can corrupt and be open to abuse, however
surrendering their natural rights to a
ruling power accountable to the people.
sovereign to gain security and order.
• The sovereign may not actually achieve peace and security.
Leviathan proposes that sovereignty
Hobbes’ theory has been very influential
• Individual rights and liberties are valuable in themselves,
should lie either in a single absolute
in Western political thought, though
monarch or in an assembly of the
much disputed. His radical view of
whole people. Whichever is chosen,
human nature has been challenged, but
Hobbes argues that sovereignty must
his argument that government authority
benevolent its aims.
not just as means to an end.
• There are alternative ways to achieve and maintain civil order without an absolute sovereign.
is essential to civil society remains
be absolute to prevent disorder.
powerful. His work laid foundations
Hobbes’ radical theories aroused
for modern social contract theory.
controversy. Royalists objected to his
Thomas Hobbes Born in Wiltshire, England, Thomas Hobbes was educated at Oxford. He became a tutor to the aristocracy and travelled in Europe, meeting major thinkers. In the 1640s, Hobbes went into exile in France during the English Civil War. He returned to England in 1651 after the execution of King Charles I.
view of the sovereign as dependent on the people, while parliamentarians and republicans saw Leviathan as a defense of tyranny.
Key works 1651 Leviathan 1665 De Corpore (On the Body) 1668 De Homine (On Man)
Disputes generally arise from the tendency of humans to compete for power and gain. An absolute sovereign is therefore required to enforce laws and maintain order.
114
I THINK,
THEREFORE I AM RENÉ DESCARTES (1596–1650)
IN CONTEXT BRANCH Epistemology APPROACH Rationalism BEFORE 4th century BCE Plato argues that knowledge comes through reason, not the senses.
13th century Theologian Thomas Aquinas claims that reason and faith (revelation) are compatible.
René Descartes is often called the “father of modern philosophy”. His revolutionary way of thinking emphasized reason and skepticism toward received wisdom. He aimed to establish absolutely certain foundations for knowledge, arguing that “the only thing I cannot doubt is that I doubt”.
Descartes was born to a wealthy family in France. He studied law at university but became interested in mathematics and philosophy. After traveling around Europe, he settled in the Netherlands to devote himself to philosophy and research. Descartes’ most famous argument is found in his Discourse on the Method (1637) and Meditations (1641). He resolves to doubt everything he possibly can, in order to find an irrefutable foundation for knowledge. His methodical doubt leads him to deny his senses, his body, the existence of the material world, even mathematics—all of which could be illusions created by an evil demon.
16th c. Philosopher Giordano Bruno promotes a rationalistic metaphysics.
The one
• Thomas Hobbes was a 17th-century English philosopher best known for his political philosophy.
• Hobbes was a physicalist, believing that everything in the universe is physical. He saw human beings as biological machines.
• In Leviathan, Hobbes stated that “The universe…is corporeal, that is to say, body.” He believed that everything, including God, occupies physical space.
• Hobbes used the concept of “animal spirits” or “physical spirits” to explain human activity and consciousness. These spirits were imperceptible but carried information around the body.
• Hobbes failed to provide a persuasive account of how the mind arises from the body. He did not address the “hard problem of consciousness”—how physical processes produce subjective experience.
• Hobbes’ argument for physicalism depends on his inaccurate assumption that the only kind of substance is body. His belief in imperceptible spirits could also justify belief in nonphysical minds.
• Hobbes’ view conflicted with Descartes’ dualism—the theory that mind and body are distinct substances. Descartes argued that the mind is nonphysical, unlike anything in the physical world.
• Hobbes’ physicalism seems to arise more from prejudice against nonphysical theories than from reasoned argument. His definition of “physical” is unclear and excludes much that we now class as physical.
• In summary, Hobbes’ theory of the human being as a purely physical mechanism is flawed and unconvincing. His assumptions and arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.
Here is a summary of Descartes’ Meditations:
-
Descartes wants to establish firm foundations for knowledge, so he subjects his beliefs to radical doubt.
-
He questions whether an evil demon could be deceiving him, making the world an illusion. If so, he cannot trust his senses.
-
He questions whether he might be dreaming. If so, he cannot rely even on reason and mathematics.
-
This radical doubt leaves him with nothing he can be certain of. He feels helplessly adrift, unable to find a footing.
-
But then he realizes that even if he is being deceived, he must exist in order to be deceived. His existence is indubitable.
-
This forms his “First Certainty”: “I think, therefore I am” or simply “I am, I exist”. His existence is self-evident and grasped intuitively.
-
From this first certainty, he seeks to rebuild knowledge on sure foundations using reason alone. His approach is rationalist and foundationalist.
-
He argues for a real distinction between mind and body. Mind is characterized by consciousness and thought; body is characterized by extension.
-
He believes that God’s existence can be proven rationally, and that God guarantees knowledge and prevents error and deception.
-
In this way, Descartes moves from radical doubt to certainty, providing philosophical grounding for science and knowledge.
René Descartes sought to overcome radical skepticism
Here is a summary of Spinoza’s main arguments:
-
There can be only one self-explanatory substance. If there were two, we would need to understand one in terms of the other, contradicting the definition of substance.
-
This one substance is what underlies the world of experience. It provides everything in the universe with its being, process of formation, purpose, shape, and matter. In these four ways, it “causes” everything.
-
This substance can be conceived under various attributes, of which the human mind can grasp two: extension (physicality) and thought (mentality). These attributes are distinct but parallel.
-
This unique substance, conceived under its attributes, is what we call “God” or “nature” (Deus sive natura). Everything else that exists is in some sense a part of it.
-
The one substance is both an extended thing (in so far as it is conceived under the attribute of extension) and a mental thing (in so far as it is conceived under the attribute of thought). In particular instances, it is both a physical event and an idea.
-
There are not two substances but only two ways of conceiving the one substance. Mind and body are two expressions of the same thing. This position is known as “substance monism.”
In summary, Spinoza argues for a metaphysical monism in which there exists only one substance, “God” or “nature,” of which mind and body are merely two attributes or expressions. This substance is the self-caused cause of all things.
Here is a summary of John Locke’s epistemology:
• Locke rejected the rationalist notion of innate ideas. He argued that there are no universal ideas or truths
that are present in the human mind at birth. If we observe newborn children, we find little evidence that they
have many ideas to begin with.
• According to Locke, the human mind at birth is like a “tabula rasa” or blank slate. All of our knowledge comes
from experience. We gain knowledge through perceiving the world with our senses and reflecting on those
perceptions with our minds.
• Locke proposed that the material world is made up of particles that are too small for us to perceive directly.
Although we cannot have direct knowledge of these corpuscles, we can infer their existence to explain things
we observe. Our knowledge of the physical world, then, goes beyond direct sense experience.
• While Locke believed all knowledge comes from experience, experience includes not just sensory perception
but also reflection - the mental operation of associating ideas, comparing them, and drawing logical conclusions.
So Locke was not strictly an empiricist, but believed experience encompasses both sensation and reasoning.
• Locke thought that we can only ever have knowledge of the observable qualities of things, not of their
underlying essences. We cannot know things as they truly are in themselves. We can only know how they
appear to us and the effects they have on us.
• For Locke, the scope of human knowledge is limited to things that can be experienced either directly or
indirectly. We cannot have knowledge of things that transcend experience, such as spiritual or supernatural entities.
So in summary, Locke held that all knowledge comes from experience, but experience is a broad category that
includes not just sensing the world but also reflecting on and reasoning about our senses. He rejected the notion of
innate ideas, thought the mind begins as a tabula rasa, and believed we can only know the observable qualities of
things, not their underlying essences. The scope of knowledge is limited to what can be experienced in some way.
Gottfried Leibniz distinguished between two kinds of truth:
-
Truths of reasoning: These are necessary truths that can be known through rational reflection and logical analysis. They relate to concepts and essences, not to particular existing things. In principle, by continuing the process of analysis we can reach a final, fundamental truth.
-
Truths of fact: These are contingent truths relating to actual things in the world. They can only be known through experience, not through reasoning alone. As the analysis of actual things is infinitely complex, we can never reach a final, complete truth about them through reasoning.
Leibniz believed that every individual thing has a distinct notion which contains all the truth about that thing, including its connections to other things. By analyzing these notions through reason, we can gain knowledge of necessary truths. But the analysis of actual things in the world is infinitely complex, so we need experience to gain knowledge of contingent truths.
In short, Leibniz saw a fundamental distinction between the rational knowledge of essences or concepts, and the empirical knowledge of existing things. Both are required for our understanding of the world.
George Berkeley’s philosophy of idealism can be summarized as follows:
• Berkeley was an empiricist who believed that all knowledge comes from experience.
• However, Berkeley took empiricism further than Locke by denying the existence of material objects independent of perception.
• According to Berkeley, the objects of experience are ideas, not physical things. They exist only in the mind.
• Our perceptions do not represent or resemble material objects in an external world. Rather, to perceive is to have an idea.
• The physical world and physical objects do not exist when they are not being perceived. As Berkeley famously put it, “esse est percipi”—to be is to be perceived.
• Nature is not itself material but consists in the laws that connect ideas, which are perceived by human and divine minds.
• The permanence and coherence of ideas is ensured by God, who perceives all things at all times. God’s constant perception of the world maintains its existence.
• Space, time, corporeality, and causality have no reality apart from the mind. They are constructs of our thinking and perceiving.
• Berkeley’s immaterialism or subjective idealism avoids the philosophical problems brought by matter and the representative theory of perception. However, it raises questions about the status of the real world.
• Berkeley’s idealism was very influential and shaped empiricism, as well as philosophers like Hume, Kant, and others. However, his system is open to objections, and most later philosophers rejected his immaterialism.
So in summary, Berkeley’s idealism denies the existence of matter and claims that the world consists solely of minds and the ideas they contain. Physical objects depend for their existence on being perceived by some mind. This solves problems with the philosophical concept of matter but raises difficult questions about reality and the external world.
The 18th century, known as the Age of Enlightenment or the Age of Reason, saw a flowering of thought across philosophy, politics, science, and economics. This period promoted scientific method, reductionism, and the primacy of human reason.
Philosophers such as Voltaire, Rousseau, Locke, and Montesquieu explored ideas of social reform, constitutional government, and individual liberty that shaped modern democracy. The American and French Revolutions put many of these Enlightenment ideas into practice.
Science advanced rapidly, with groundbreaking work by Lavoisier on chemistry, Laplace on probability and statistics, and Linnæus on biological classification. The Industrial Revolution began in Britain, driven by technological innovation and the move to mechanization, marking the start of the modern factory system.
improvements
skepticism and materialism associated been under the control of the Catholic Church.
with the Enlightenment. Key Enlightenment
thinkers like Voltaire and Diderot promoted While feudalism declined, most Europeans
deism, atheism, and anticlericalism. The
still lived difficult lives as peasants. However,
extraordinary success of Diderot and the spread of Enlightenment ideals, new
d’Alembert’s Encyclopédie helped spread scientific knowledge, and a rising middle class
Enlightenment ideas throughout Europe.
would spur calls for political and social reform
that shaped the modern world.
THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 145
The Enlightenment
The Enlightenment was an intellectual movement that emerged in Western Europe in the 18th century. Centered around reason and scientific method, Enlightenment thinkers promoted intellectual interchange and challenged traditional institutions and beliefs. Key ideas that shaped the Enlightenment included:
• Reason: Enlightenment thinkers argued that rational thought could lead to human progress. They opposed traditional authority and superstition.
• Scientific method: The works of scientists like Isaac Newton demonstrated that observation and experiment could reveal the natural laws governing the universe. This approach was seen as a model for achieving knowledge in many fields.
• Liberalism: Enlightenment thinkers explored individual liberty, constitutional government, and the social contract theory of the state. Key proponents include John Locke and Montesquieu.
• Deism: Some Enlightenment thinkers promoted deism, a rational and naturalistic view of God and the universe. Deists rejected divine revelation and religious superstition. Key proponents include Voltaire and Thomas Paine.
• Secularism: Enlightenment thinkers tended to emphasize reason and scientific knowledge over religious belief. Some promoted concepts of materialism, atheism, and anticlericalism that challenged traditional religious authority.
• Cosmopolitanism: Enlightenment thinkers believed in the unity of humanity and promoted tolerance, reason, and international cooperation. Nationality and ethnic differences were seen as secondary to our shared humanity.
• Progress: Most Enlightenment thinkers believed that human reason and scientific advancement would lead to progress in society: moral, intellectual, and material. There was optimism that reason could improve the human condition.
The Enlightenment shaped revolutionary ideas that led to democratic reforms in government, including key documents such as the Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789). However, the Enlightenment also received criticism for excessive optimism in reason, human progress, science, and individualism. Critics argued that it lacked historical and religious perspectives. Nonetheless, the Enlightenment remains the foundation for modern Western liberal democracy.
The Scientific Revolution The Scientific Revolution of the 17th century saw the emergence of modern science through groundbreaking discoveries and theories in astronomy, physics, chemistry, and more. Key contributors include:
• Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543): His heliocentric theory that the Earth revolves around the Sun challenged the established Ptolemaic geocentric model. Copernicus helped spark the Scientific Revolution.
• Johannes Kepler (1571-1630): His laws of planetary motion described the orbits of the planets, with the Sun at the center. Kepler built on Copernicus’s work.
• Galileo Galilei (1564-1642): A key proponent of the heliocentric model, Galileo used observations with the newly invented telescope to provide evidence for Copernicus’s theory. He also studied inertia, acceleration, and astronomy.
• Isaac Newton (1643-1727): Newton’s theories of gravitation and classical mechanics had a profound influence on the Scientific Revolution. In Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687), Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion.
• Robert Hooke (1635-1703): Hooke studied microscopy, astronomy, and paleontology. He worked with Robert Boyle and was a founding member of the Royal Society. Hooke proposed a wave theory of light and anticipated the cell theory in biology.
• Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723): Using simple microscopes, van Leeuwenhoek was the first to observe bacteria, protozoa, and many microscopic organisms unknown before. He is known as the “father of microbiology.”
• Robert Boyle (1627-1691): Boyle studied chemistry and is known for Boyle’s law relating pressure and volume of gases. He was a founder of the Royal Society, which helped establish the scientific method.
The Scientific Revolution represented a paradigm shift from medieval natural philosophy to modern science based on observation, experiment, and mathematical analysis. It transformed our understanding of the natural world and laid the groundwork for modern science.
146 THE AGE OF REVOLUTION
The Industrial Revolution
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) was a Genevan philosopher and writer. His political philosophy influenced the French Revolution and the overall development of modern political and educational thought.
Rousseau’s key works include:
• Discourse on the Arts and Sciences (1750): Argued that the arts and sciences had corrupted human morality. Rousseau believed civilization led to inequality and vice.
• The Social Contract (1762): Outlined Rousseau’s political philosophy. He argued for popular sovereignty and a social contract between rulers and people. Rousseau said governments derive their right to rule from the consent of the governed.
• Emile, or On Education (1762): Rousseau’s theory of education and child development. He proposed an educational method tailored to a student’s developmental stages, allowing children to develop naturally without constraints of civilization.
Rousseau’s main ideas include:
• Social contract: Governments derive their authority and legitimacy from the consent and participation of their citizens, not divine right or tradition. Rulers and people enter into a social contract.
• General will: The general will represents the common good of citizens. It is sovereign over the individual wills of rulers or citizens. Rousseau believed the general will would lead to virtuous policies and equality.
• Civil religion: Rousseau proposed a civil religion with principles common to all religions that would strengthen the state. Religious toleration should be extended to all religions that accept the civil religion.
• Natural man: In a state of nature, man is essentially good and innocent. It is society and civilization that corrupt our nature and lead to inequality, selfishness, and vice.
• Popular sovereignty: Governments should express the general will of citizens. Rulers hold power only as delegation from the people, so the people are collectively sovereign.
• Liberty and equality: Rousseau emphasized both liberty and equality. Individual liberty finds meaning in participation in political bodies which make citizens equal partners in the social contract.
• Education: In Emile, Rousseau proposed an educational method where children can develop naturally according to their stage of growth. Education should avoid corrupting influences of society and teach self-reliance and virtue.
Rousseau’s political philosophy inspired both radical and moderate ideas of Enlightenment and democracy. His works inspired leaders of the French Revolution but were also criticized for a lack of practicality. Rousseau remains one of the most influential Enlightenment thinkers, shaping modern concepts of democracy, civil religion, education, and human development.
Key Leaders of the Enlightenment
The 18th century saw an explosion of intellectual activity centered around reason, science, individualism and radical thought. Key leaders of the Enlightenment include:
• Voltaire (1694-1778): The pen name of François-Marie Arouet, a French writer and philosopher known for his wit and defense of civil liberties. He advocated for freedom of religion, expression and the separation of church and state.
• Denis Diderot (1713-1784): A French philosopher, writer and editor of the Encyclopédie, a comprehensive encyclopedia representing Enlightenment thought. The Encyclopédie helped disseminate Enlightenment ideas across Europe.
• David Hume (1711-1776): A Scottish philosopher known for his empiricism and skepticism. Hume advocated for naturalism and secularism in philosophy, and explored liberalism in political thought. He was a key figure in the Scottish Enlightenment.
• Thomas Paine (1737-1809): An English political activist who supported American and French revolutions. His pamphlets Common Sense (1776) and The Rights of Man (1791) advocated Enlightenment ideals of democracy, constitutionalism, and attacks on traditional institutions.
• Mary Wollstonecraft (1759
Here is a summary of the key ideas in the passage:
-
David Hume was an 18th-century Scottish philosopher. He lived during the Enlightenment, a time when traditional authority and beliefs were being questioned through reason and empirical evidence.
-
Hume divided all human mental experiences into impressions (sensations, feelings, emotions) and ideas (thoughts, beliefs, imaginings). He argued that all ideas are derived from impressions, so if there is no corresponding impression, an idea has no meaning. This is known as Hume’s fork.
-
Hume was an empiricist. He believed that all human knowledge comes from experience and that reason alone cannot produce new ideas. He rejected the notion of innate ideas.
-
Hume was a skeptical philosopher. He believed that we can never have absolute certainty about anything except mathematical and logical truths. All factual or “metaphysical” knowledge is based on the fallible evidence of the senses and scientific conclusions are provisional.
-
Hume argued that we have no rational basis for some metaphysical beliefs like the existence of God or the external world. He concluded that such notions arise from psychological causes, not reason. This form of skepticism called all philosophical doctrines into question.
-
Hume believed that morality is based on sentiment, not reason. Moral judgments arise from the feelings and “passions” of human nature. Reason alone cannot determine moral truths. Ethics is therefore subordinate to human psychology.
-
Hume had a great influence on later philosophers like Kant. His radical empiricism and skepticism shaped debates in epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics. He is considered one of the most important Enlightenment thinkers.
That covers the essence of Hume’s philosophy as described in the passage. Please let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
David Hume was a Scottish empiricist philosopher who lived in the 18th century. He challenged the notion of rationalism set forth by philosophers like Descartes. Hume argued that knowledge comes from experience or impressions, not innate ideas.
Hume divided all statements into two types: demonstrative and probable. Demonstrative statements were logical or mathematical truths that could not be denied without contradiction, like “2+2=4.” Probable statements were empirical claims that could be verified through evidence and experience.
Hume then applied this framework to the problem of induction. Inductive reasoning involves inferring from the past to the future, as when we assume the sun will rise tomorrow just because it has risen every day in the past. Hume argued this type of inference was not rationally justified. The statement “the sun will rise tomorrow” is neither demonstrative (it could be false without contradiction) nor probable (we can’t experience the future sunrise).
According to Hume, we make inductive inferences out of “custom” or “habit.” We are naturally inclined to assume the future will resemble the past. While not rationally justified, inductive reasoning is useful and guides us in everyday life. We should still apply it cautiously, though, and not automatically infer cause and effect relationships without considerable evidence.
Hume’s arguments dealt a major blow to rationalism and emphasized the role of belief and habit in human knowledge and reasoning. His work influenced later philosophers like Kant, Wittgenstein, and Popper. Hume highlighted the “problem of induction” that continues to be debated by philosophers today.
In summary, Hume argued our knowledge comes from experience, not reason alone. He challenged the rationalist notion of innate ideas and showed how inductive reasoning is based on belief and habit, not logic. Though not rationally justified, inductive inference still guides us in everyday life, but should be applied carefully. Hume’s work dealt a significant challenge to rationalism that continues to influence modern philosophy.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an 18th-century Enlightenment philosopher who challenged conventional thinking. In his Discourse on the Sciences and Arts, he controversially argued that the progress of the sciences and arts had corrupted morality. In his Discourse on Inequality, he theorized that humanity in a state of nature was fundamentally good, but that society and civilization had led to inequality, vice, and the loss of freedom.
Rousseau believed that when people began to claim private property, it led to the development of society. Laws were then imposed to protect property, resulting in the loss of natural virtue and empathy. Although humanity was naturally virtuous, society corrupted people. Although people were born free, society’s laws put them “in chains.”
Rousseau proposed a solution in his work The Social Contract. He envisioned an alternative society governed collectively by citizens according to the “general will.” Rousseau’s radical ideas helped inspire the French Revolution. His vision of humanity in a state of nature as virtuous and free shaped the Romantic movement. Although often misunderstood, Rousseau did not see natural humanity as “noble savages” but as naturally compassionate, with reason and society corrupting innate goodness.
In summary, Rousseau believed:
-
Humanity in a state of nature was good but society corrupted virtue.
-
Society resulted in inequality, vice, and loss of freedom. Laws favored the rich over the poor.
-
Although born free, people were “in chains” under the unequal laws of society.
-
An ideal society would follow the general will of citizens, not the powerful elite.
-
The progress of arts and sciences led to the decline of morality.
-
Rousseau’s radical ideas influenced revolution and shaped Romanticism.
Does this summary accurately reflect Rousseau’s key philosophical ideas? Let me know if you would like me to clarify or expand on any part of the summary.
• Adam Smith argues that self-interest is the primary human motivation. However, he says people also show benevolence toward others, especially when they need help to survive.
• Smith says humans are “animals that make bargains.” We exchange goods and services with others in mutually beneficial ways. These bargains arise from self-interest but also allow society to function.
• The division of labor refers to the specialization of work. Rather than each person being self-sufficient, people focus on specific skills and trade with others. This increases productivity.
• Smith illustrates the benefits of the division of labor with the example of pin manufacturing. Many workers each performing a single task can produce far more pins than a single worker doing every task.
• The free market allows people to pursue their self-interest through mutually beneficial exchanges. Smith sees this as the basis for a fair and prosperous society. Money facilitates market exchanges by eliminating the need for bartering.
• Smith argues that civil society depends on cooperation and mutual assistance between many people. Although self-interest motivates individuals, the interdependence of people in the market also binds society together.
• Smith believes the increasing division of labor and specialization of work will continue to improve productivity, as in the Industrial Revolution. The free market and self-interest drive this progress.
That covers the key elements in Smith’s philosophy regarding self-interest, exchange, specialization, and markets according to the information given. Please let me know if you would like me to explain or expand on any part of the summary.
• Immanuel Kant believed philosophy had failed for 2,000 years to prove the existence of an external world outside our consciousness. He was particularly critical of Descartes, who doubted all knowledge other than
previous ages.
Kant’s key insight was that
knowledge requires both sensibility
(the senses) and understanding
our own existence, and Berkeley, who said the only things we can know are our own perceptions.
(the ability to think). Both are
• Kant argued that we can only experience time through things that change in the world, so the existence of
equally necessary for knowledge.
Without sensibility, we would have no
experience through which we could
exercise our understanding; without
something that changes requires there to be an external world. Our certainty about the external world is as
great as our certainty of our own consciousness.
• Kant was impressed by the progress of science but believed empiricism (that all knowledge comes through
experience) could not fully explain this. We require both sensibility (experience) and understanding (reason)
to have knowledge. Space and time are not learned through experience but are intuitions supplied by our mind.
understanding (concepts and
• Things in themselves (noumena) are unknowable. We can only know appearances (phenomena) — the
rules for thinking), we would
way our mind represents the world to us. The world conforms to our knowledge, not the other way round.
not be able to cognize objects
and events even through sensibility.
What is really fundamental to
knowledge, according to Kant, are
the concepts of space and time,
which he calls “pure intuitions.”
These intuitions are supplied
Kant developed a new theory called transcendental idealism that overturned the disagreement between empiricists and rationalists. He aimed to determine the limits of human knowledge and how we should reason
and act. Kant believed philosophy’s goal was to answer three central questions: What can I know? What should
I do? What may I hope? His answers formed the basis of modern philosophy.
by the human mind, rather than
being learned through experience.
They are the framework within
which sensibility and understanding
can operate, and without which
there could be no knowledge
- According to Kant, knowledge requires both intuitions (direct sensory experience) and concepts (abstract ideas).
- Some knowledge comes from experience (empirical knowledge) while some is independent of experience (a priori knowledge).
- Space, time, and concepts like substance are a priori, meaning they are the necessary preconditions of experience.
- We cannot know things-in-themselves, things independent of our experience. We can only know the phenomenal world, the world as it appears to us.
- A priori knowledge makes science and a strict demarcation of the limits of knowledge possible. But it also means we cannot have knowledge of things like God, the soul, free will, etc.
- Kant’s position is called transcendental idealism: Space, time and a priori concepts are features of our experience, not of things-in-themselves.
Here is a summary of Jeremy Bentham’s philosophy:
Utilitarianism
BEFORE 4th century BCE Aristotle argues that the highest virtue is happiness
(eudaimonia). 1214 CE Peter Abelard proposed the idea that right is determined by intention.
AFTER 1861 John Stuart Mill develops utilitarianism further, arguing for individual liberty and rights. 1958 G. E. Moore argues in Principia Ethica that intrinsic good (and not pleasure alone) is the correct utilitarian standard.
pain and the Pursuit of happiness For Bentham, the goal of ethics
and pleasure. He argued that
was to promote human well-being
these two principles could form
and happiness. He advocated creating
the basis for an ethical philosophy
a system of law and governance that
called “utilitarianism”. Its central aim
would provide “the greatest happiness for the greatest number” of citizens. By focusing on simple, quantifiable measures of pleasure and pain, utility,
1983 Robert Nozick’s book Anarchy, State, and Utopia advances a libertarian theory that challenges utilitarian arguments.
could calculate the costs and benefits of any action to determine whether or not it was morally right. Bentham believed that individuals always act out of self-interest to gain pleasure and avoid pain. So by structuring laws and institutions to align the interests of individuals with the general well-being of society, the greatest overall happiness could
7 0 1 2 3 8 7
be achieved. His vision of a utilitarian society
THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 17S published
• An Introduction to the Principles
emphasized individual freedom, equality, and
of Morals and Legislation (1781),in
universal suffrage.
which he laid out his theory of
Bentham has been hugely influential
utilitarianism based on “the greatest happiness principle”.
• Panopticon Writings (1791), describing his idea for an ‘ideal
prison’ enabling total surveillance
in philosophy, political science, economics, and law. His work laid the foundations for
of inmates.
liberal reforms in Britain and inspired early
• Proposals for Judicial Reform
socialists and anarchists. Though controversial,
(1792), arguing for the codification of laws and judicial transparency. Jeremy Bentham’s preservedbody (dressed in his own clothes) is on public display at University College London. He requested that his corpse be dissected as part of a public anatomy lecture.
his radical utilitarian philosophy continues to shape debates over ethics, governance, and social policy today.
Here is a summary of Georg Hegel’s philosophy:
preeminent German
• Hegel believed that reality is not static but is constantly changing as a result of
philosopher of the 19th century.
the dialectical process of history. This process involves the emergence of ideas
Metaphysics
He saw the world as fundamentally
(thesis), which then come into conflict with opposing ideas (antithesis), resulting
APPROACH
rational, and believed that reality
in a synthesis of the two which incorporates the truth of both. This synthesis then
itself—including human history,
becomes a new thesis, and the whole process is repeated. For Hegel, history shows
German idealism
politics, and thought—is the
the progressive unfolding of the World Spirit or Absolute Idea as it overcomes
BEFORE
progressive self-realization of Spirit
limitations through conflict and contradiction.
4th century BCE Plato proposes
(Absolute Idea or Reason). According
• Hegel saw the dialectical process of history culminating in the rationalist political
the theory of forms—an ideal,
to his dialectical method, progress
structures of the 19th-century Prussian state. He believed that history had come
unchanging reality behind the
is made through the conflict of
to an end with the advent of the rational state.
changing world of objects and
opposites and the reconciliation of
• Hegel rejected Kant’s notion that we can never have knowledge of things-in-
events. For Plato, ultimate reality
contradictions. He believed this
themselves. Hegel argued that philosophy can attain absolute knowledge of reality
is rational and intelligible.
process culminates in the Prussian
through a dialectical investigation of our conceptual thought. Our thought and reality
state, which he saw as an embodiment
are co-terminous and interpenetrating. Philosophy is able to grasp this totality.
1789 Immanuel Kant argues
of reason in the real world.
that while we cannot have
• Hegel proposed an all-embracing philosophical system that aimed to encompass
knowledge of “things-in-
Hegel’s metaphysical system
all spheres of reality. His system incorporates theories of ethics, aesthetics, politics,
Hegel developed an elaborate
themselves” (the world as it
and logic. For Hegel, philosophy itself is the highest expression of the Spirit’s
really is), we can know the
self-realization in thought.
world as it appears to us,
philosophical system that
interpreted through our mind.
encompassed the whole of reality. His theories of history, politics,
That is the proper object of
ethics, aesthetics, and logic were
philosophical inquiry.
all interconnected. He aimed to achieve total knowledge of the
AFTER
Absolute—the ultimate reality
1900s Logical positivism rejects
that underlies all appearances.
Hegelian metaphysics as
For Hegel, philosophy was itself
meaningless. Philosophers such
the highest expression of the
as Russell argue that philosophy
Absolute comprehending itself
should aim to analyze language
through human thought.
and solve logical problems, not make grand metaphysical claims.
See also: Plato 50–55 ■ Immanuel Kant 164–71 ■ G.W.F. Hegel 180–85
■ Bertrand Russell 254–55 ■ Karl Popper 258–63
THE AGE OF REVOLUTION 181
IN CONTEXT
Hegel said, “Freedom is the
BRANCH
fundamental character
of the will.” By this he meant that
Human beings cannot be free if they
Ethics
freedom defines human will or
act from desire, passion, self-interest,
intentional action. For Hegel,
or any other contingent motivation.
APPROACH
freedom is achieved through
True freedom requires acting from
German idealism
reason and an understanding of
reason in accordance with universal
BEFORE
necessity. Merely following our
moral law. For Hegel, this law is
4th century BCE Aristotle says
passions or desires does not make
embodied in society’s ethical life,
that being virtuous and acting
us free in a deeper sense. True
institutions, customs, and laws.
according to reason is the path
freedom, Hegel argues, comes
As individuals, our task is not
to wellbeing and happiness.
only with understanding the
just to pursue our own happiness
17th century Benedict Spinoza
necessity that governs events
and desires, but to understand
argues that liberating ourselves
and finding our role within that
where true freedom lies within the
from bondage to emotions and
order. Freedom is achieved by
existing social order. Ethical action
passions allows us to understand
willing in accord with universal
involves upholding the laws and
necessity (God or Nature) and
moral law.
customs of one’s community,
act virtuously.
According to Hegel, the
understanding one’s social role and
trajectory of history is the
responsibilities, and so realizing
18th century Immanuel Kant
progressive realization of freedom.
one’s own freedom and rationality. ■
says we achieve freedom by
At each stage, individuals gain
acting according to principles
a wider understanding of necessity
of reason and duty. Happiness
and a correspondingly greater
should not be the motivation
degree of freedom and rational
for moral action.
self-determination. However,
AFTER
Lacking an ethical life
within the institutions, practices,
20th century Existentialists
in common, men lack the
and customs of society, freedom is
such as Sartre argue that we
element in which they can
abstract and empty. According to
have complete freedom to
recognize and respect one
Hegel, individuals must find their
determine our own essence
freedom in their participation in
through the choices we make.
another as free.
social ethical life, not in isolation
Georg Hegel
from it. Freedom is achieved by understanding necessity, and necessity is embodied in the ethical and social structures of the time.
Society and the state represent ethical freedom realized.
See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ Benedict Spinoza 126-29 ■ Immanuel Kant 164–71
■ Jean-Paul Sartre 266–71
Georg Hegel
182 GEORG HEGEL
IN CONTEXT
BRANCH
Hegel’s explanation of
self-realization of Spirit. History is
Aesthetics
art and beauty formed
the unfolding realization of the
an important part of his huge
Absolute Idea—the ultimate reality
APPROACH
philosophical system. For Hegel,
that underlies all appearances.
“the beautiful” is an expression of
He argued that art plays an
German idealism
“the Absolute” (Spirit or Reason)
important role in this process.
BEFORE
in the realm of art, just as religion,
All art starts from the idea of
4th century BCE Plato argues
philosophy, and the state represent
unity with the Absolute, which
that art imitates the physical
its expression in other spheres. Art,
is then progressively realized
world, which is itself an
he argues, allows the Spirit to
through symbolic, classical, and
imperfect imitation of the real
manifest itself sensuously, for
romantic forms of art. Finally,
world of unchanging forms.
immediate apprehension.
in the romantic stage, art achieves
For Hegel, art, religion,
a unity of meaning and shape that
4th century BCE Aristotle says
philosophy, and other elements
allows the deepest insight into the
the goal of art is to imitate
of culture evolve as part of the
Absolute. At this point, art has
human action in an idealized
fulfilled its purpose and is
form. Art should aim at beauty
superseded by philosophy.
and create universal truths.
According to Hegel, all cultural phenomena—including art—move
1790 Immanuel Kant argues
dialectically through a process of
that our experiences of beauty
thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.
are entirely subjective but also
Different art forms emerge and
share a commonsense basis.
are superse
The single most famous German philosopher during the first half of the 19th century was Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. His central idea was that all phenomena, from consciousness to political institutions, are aspects of a single Spirit (by which he means “mind” or “idea”) that over the course of time is reintegrating these aspects into itself. This process of reintegration is what Hegel calls the “dialectic”, and it is one that we (who are all aspects of Spirit) understand as “history.”
Hegel believed that Spirit progresses through a dialectical process in which it passes from stage to stage, each new stage (or synthesis) transcending the contradictions inherent in the previous stage. According to Hegel, this progress ultimately leads to the full self-realization of Spirit in the form of the modern democratic state. He was therefore a monist, believing that all things are aspects of a single thing (Spirit), and an idealist, believing that reality is ultimately something non-material (Spirit).
Hegel argued against Kant’s notion of a “world-in-itself” beyond our experience, claiming that there is nothing beyond what comes to manifestation in consciousness. He also criticized Kant for assuming that the categories of thought are fixed and unchanging. For Hegel, the categories themselves develop over time through the progress of Spirit.
Hegel’s thought has been hugely influential. His dialectical method in particular inspired responses by Arthur Schopenhauer, Karl Marx, and Jean-Paul Sartre, among others. Hegel represents the culmination of German Idealism, radically transforming philosophy with his vision of reality as the historical development of Spirit.
Here is a summary of Arthur Schopenhauer’s key ideas:
• The world as we perceive it is a representation of the mind. There is a deeper reality beneath the world of appearances which we call the “thing-in-itself”.
• The thing-in-itself is the Will - a blind, aimless, purposeless striving and urge. The Will expresses itself in the world as the constant striving and desires of all beings.
• The Will is the innermost essence of everything in the universe - including animals, humans, and all of nature. The Will is the driving force behind all actions and natural phenomena.
• The Will constantly generates craving and striving. All desires arise from a deficiency felt by the Will. When one desire is satisfied, another arises to take its place. This is the endless cycle of desire and suffering.
• Aesthetic experience and ethical behavior can lead to a denial of the Will. By contemplating art or behaving compassionately, we can achieve a temporary escape from the endless striving of the Will. This results in a peaceful state of mind.
• Ultimately, denial of the Will is the only way to escape suffering. By rejecting desires and attachments to the world, we can achieve a saintly state of calm and inner peace. This is a quasi-mystical experience of transcending the Will.
• Schopenhauer believed that philosophy should be a means for attaining insight into the human condition and achieving inner peace or tranquility. His metaphysical system was meant to diagnose the root cause of suffering and provide a therapeutic remedy.
That covers the essence of Schopenhauer’s philosophical system and his view of the world. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
• Ludwig Feuerbach was a 19th-century German philosopher known for his book The Essence of Christianity (1841).
• Feuerbach argued that rather than theology being the study of God, it is really anthropology - the study of humanity.
• He believed that humans have created the idea of God out of our own desires and longings for virtues like love, compassion, and kindness.
• We have imagined a being that embodies these virtues in the highest degree and called it “God.” But these virtues actually exist in humans, not in Gods.
• Feuerbach argued we should focus less on heavenly righteousness and more on human justice in this life on Earth. Humans, not Gods, deserve our attention.
• Feuerbach saw humans as the creators of God, not the creation of God. We have deceived ourselves into thinking a divine being exists.
• Feuerbach believed we have lost sight of what we are ourselves in creating the idea of God. We should rediscover our own virtues and potential, not project them onto deities.
• Feuerbach’s ideas influenced later thinkers like Marx and Freud, who saw religion as a human creation that satisfies psychological needs. But for Feuerbach, the idea of God is really just a reflection of human ideals.
That covers the essence of Feuerbach’s argument that theology is really anthropology, because God is a human creation, not the other way around. Let me know if you would like me to elaborate on any part of the summary.
• Thomas Hobbes believed that without government, people would behave brutishly, so they establish the social contract and a sovereign to maintain order.
• John Locke wrote that people have natural rights and establish government through consent and social contract to protect those rights. His ideas influenced liberalism.
• Jeremy Bentham advocated the principle of utility: the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
• John Stuart Mill built on Bentham’s utilitarianism. He said individuals should be free to pursue happiness but not harm others. He advocated freedom of speech and other civil liberties.
• Mill’s ideas influenced later liberal thinkers like John Maynard Keynes and shaped modern liberalism and economics.
• Mill advocated freedom and reform rather than revolution. He said society and education should foster an association between individual and social good.
• Mill tried to reconcile utilitarianism and empiricism with new romantic ideas. He said higher pleasures like intellectual pursuits contribute more to happiness than physical pleasures.
• Mill argued for women’s suffrage and against slavery. He believed individual freedom and fulfillment benefit society.
• Mill’s ideas influenced thinkers like Bertrand Russell, Karl Popper, William James, and John Rawls.
Here is a summary of Marx’s argument:
• Marx believed that the history of human society was driven by class struggle. In each historical period, there is a dominant class that exploits a subordinate class.
• In Marx’s time, the dominant class was the bourgeoisie - the capitalist class who owned the means of production. The subordinate class was the proletariat - the workers who sold their labor.
• The bourgeoisie had gained power through the rise of industrial capitalism. As markets grew and demand for goods rose, traditional craftspeople could not keep up and were replaced by factories. The factory owners accumulated wealth and power.
• Marx criticized the bourgeoisie for reducing human relationships to economic self-interest and “callous ‘cash payment’“. People were valued only for what they could produce and consume, not for who they were.
• Marx believed the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and proletariat would lead to a revolution by the proletariat, who would seize the means of production. This would lead to a classless and stateless communist society.
• Marx articulated these ideas in The Communist Manifesto, published in 1848. The Manifesto laid out Marx’s vision for an egalitarian communist society and called upon the proletariat to unite and overthrow the bourgeoisie.
So in short, Marx reduced history to class struggle, and believed the struggle between the bourgeoisie and proletariat would lead to a communist revolution that would fundamentally transform human society. His ideas were hugely influential and shaped global politics for generations.
-
Karl Marx was a 19th-century philosopher who analyzed the historical development of human society in terms of class conflict and the means of production.
-
According to Marx, as the means of production change, society progresses through different economic systems or “modes of production,” including tribalism, slavery, feudalism, and capitalism. Each mode of production benefits a different class, leading to class conflict.
-
In capitalism, the bourgeoisie (property owners) exploit the proletariat (workers) by extracting surplus value from their labor. Marx predicted this conflict would ultimately lead to a revolution in which the proletariat seize the means of production, establish a socialist system, and create a classless utopia.
-
Marx believed social institutions like religion, philosophy, and politics are influenced by the economic system and serve to promote the interests of the ruling class. As the economic system changes, so too do these institutions. For Marx, material and economic factors shape society more than ideas.
-
Marx’s theory of historical materialism uses a dialectical view of change as progressing through a cycle of conflict and resolution, not as a spiritual journey. Marx adapted the dialectic from Hegel but gave it a material rather than idealist basis.
-
According to Marx, class interests, not ideas, are the driving force behind historical change and political events. The ruling class gains and maintains power by promoting the illusion it acts in the general interest. But in reality, politics is shaped by underlying class conflicts.
-
Marx drew on influences such as Hegel, Feuerbach, Rousseau, and Smith. His work combines German idealism, French revolutionary thought, and British political economy. Although Marx built on pre-existing ideas, his synthesis was original.
That covers the key highlights of Marx’s theory, including historical materialism, class conflict, dialectical change, the influence of the economic system, and Marx’s intellectual influences and sources. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
Here is a summary of Charles Sanders Peirce’s pragmatic maxim:
AFTER
observable effects that follow from it.
1878 With Peirce, William James and others found
Meaning depends on effects: According to Peirce, the meaning of any concept or idea is determined by the sensory
pragmatism.
effects we can attribute to it. We cannot know anything purely through abstract reasoning or speculation—there must be some practical consequences to our beliefs and theoretical claims.
1906 Peirce coins the phrase
“pragmatic maxim”.
Reject metaphysics: Peirce was deeply skeptical of abstract metaphysical speculation that could not be tied to practical effects or consequences. He believed many philosophical debates were just “debates about words” if they could
1907 Pragmatism is popularized in William
not specify any differences in sensory experience.
James’s book Pragmatism.
What works is truth: For the pragmatists, the “truth” of an idea or concept is not an abstract representation of reality, but rather what “works” in practice—what is useful and has valuable consequences. So pragmatism evaluates ideas in terms of their practical usefulness and success.
Focus on practice: Pragmatism is concerned with practical consequences and experiential effects, not abstract theory or speculation. It aims to shift philosophy away from mere theorizing toward a focus on practice, experience, and the connection between thought and action.
See also: John Locke 152–57 ■ Immanuel Kant 182–87 ■ William James 272–75
Here is a summary of William James’s pragmatism:
-
Truth is not static or inherent, but is made through experience and events. Truth “happens to” an idea as we act upon it.
-
The truth of an idea depends on its usefulness and practical consequences, not just logical consistency. An idea is true if it accomplishes what is required of it.
-
We have a “right to believe” in ideas that guide our actions, even without conclusive evidence. Our beliefs shape reality by influencing what we do.
-
Reality is constantly changing and “still in the making.” Truth is an ongoing process, not a fixed state. We can’t fully grasp reality through empirical observation alone.
-
Beliefs, especially religious ones, can be pragmatically useful even if not factually true. A belief is true if it leads to positive consequences like a fulfilling life.
-
We must test ideas through action and experience, not just logical reasoning. The pragmatic method focuses on practical effects rather than abstract principles.
-
Truth is shaped by its effects and usefulness, not just logical validity or correspondence to the facts. Pragmatism focuses on the difference ideas can make in life.
-
Our actions create the world around us. We should “act as if what we do makes a difference” because our beliefs and choices actively construct reality.
That covers the essence of James’s pragmatic philosophy, with an emphasis on practical consequences, experiential truth, the role of belief, and reality as an ongoing process of events. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more depth.
Here is a summary of Nietzsche’s central ideas in Thus Spoke Zarathustra:
• Nietzsche attacks three key ideas of Western thought: our concept of “man”, our concept of God, and our moral ideas. He believes these undermine human potential.
• Nietzsche believes the idea of “man” as traditionally understood in Christianity is limiting. He says we must “surpass” this idea by overcoming Christianity’s belief that this world is less important than some next, spiritual world.
• Nietzsche proclaims “God is dead!”. By this he means belief in God can no longer give meaning or purpose to human life in the modern world. We must find our own sources of meaning and value.
• Nietzsche argues against traditional Christian morality, which he believes promotes a “slave morality” that holds people back. He believes we need a new “master morality” that celebrates human vitality, courage, and purpose.
• Nietzsche’s prophet Zarathustra descends from his mountain retreat to share his wisdom with humanity. But he finds people are not yet ready to receive his radical message about overcoming traditional values and embracing a new vision of human possibility.
• Although Nietzsche’s style is often heated and intense, his work articulates a remarkably cohesive vision of human potential and meaning in a world where “God is dead”. His radical ideas went on to have an enormous influence.
That covers the central themes and ideas in Nietzsche’s influential work. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
Zarathustra, a prophet modeled on the ancient Persian philosopher Zoroaster, has been living alone in the mountains for 10 years. He realizes that “God is dead” and decides to share this revelation with humankind. On his way down the mountain, Zarathustra meets an old hermit who warns him that no one will understand his radical message.
Zarathustra goes to the marketplace and proclaims the coming of the “Superman” who will overcome ordinary humanity. However, the crowd laughs at him, seeing him as merely an entertainer. To understand Nietzsche’s philosophy, we must look beyond the superficial reception of his ideas.
Nietzsche believes we must reevaluate all values inherited from religion and philosophy. Saying “God is dead” means questioning traditional morality and the idea that a transcendent realm of ideals exists. Nietzsche sees belief in a purely “real” world as a myth that prevents us from living fully in this world.
Both Plato and Christianity divided the world into a transcendent, permanent realm of ideals or heaven and an imperfect sensory world. Nietzsche sees this as devaluing life itself in favor of an illusory afterlife. The Superman represents humanity that has overcome reliance on otherworldly hopes and lives powerfully in this world.
In summary, Nietzsche’s Zarathustra comes down from solitary contemplation to proclaim a radical philosophy of affirming life in this world rather than deferring to otherworldly hopes. But his message meets only incomprehension. Nietzsche sees the belief in a transcendent “real world” as rooted in Plato and Christianity, and as denying life’s value. Overcoming this belief through a “revaluation of values” will produce the Superman.
Here is a summary of Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory of language as a system of signs:
- Saussure saw language as made up of signs, with each sign consisting of two parts:
-
The signifier: The sound-image or written symbol that represents something. For example, the word “dog”.
-
The signified: The mental concept associated with the signifier. For example, our idea of what a dog is.
-
The relationship between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary. There is nothing inherent about the word “dog” that connects it to the concept of a dog. It could just as easily be “chien” or “gou” in other languages.
-
For Saussure, language is a system of relationships between signs. The meaning of any one sign depends on its relationship to other signs in the system. So “dog” only means what it does because of how it differs from “cat”, “log”, “dig”, and so on.
-
Saussure’s theory of language as a system of signs became the foundation for modern linguistics and influenced many philosophers and literary theorists. It provides a way to analyze how meaning is created within language and culture.
-
The key ideas are that:
-
Language is a system of signs
-
Each sign consists of a signifier (a symbol) and a signified (a mental concept)
-
The relationship between the signifier and signified is arbitrary
-
Meaning comes from the relationships between signs within the system
That covers the essence of Saussure’s theory of language, according to my understanding. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in more depth.
• Henri Bergson believes there are two kinds of knowledge: relative knowledge and absolute knowledge.
• Relative knowledge involves knowing objects from a particular perspective. It is gained through our intellect and reason. We remain distant from the thing itself.
• Absolute knowledge involves knowing objects as they actually are. It is acquired through intuition—a very direct form of knowledge.
• Bergson thinks Immanuel Kant underestimated the importance of intuition. Intuition allows us to grasp an object’s uniqueness through direct connection. It is linked to Bergson’s vitalism: his idea of an élan vital or life-force.
• Bergson gives the example of getting to know a city. Compiling images of the city involves relative knowledge—we remain distant from the living city. Walking the streets and focusing the right way can lead to absolute knowledge of the city itself.
• Intuition means seeing the world in terms of our sense of unfolding time. Our inner sense of time overlaps with the times of the objects around us, allowing direct connection.
• For Bergson, “intuition goes in the very direction of life.” It reflects the vital impulse of life itself. Analysis and intellect pull us away from this direct experience of life.
• Bergson believes philosophy should aim to put us in contact with absolute reality through intuitive thinking. His vitalism sees life as creative evolution.
That’s a summary of Bergson’s ideas relating to intuition, knowledge, and vitalism. Let me know if you would like me to clarify or expand on any part of the summary.
John Dewey was an influential American pragmatist philosopher. He believed that philosophy should help us solve practical problems in life, rather than provide a “true” picture of the world.
For Dewey, philosophical problems arise naturally from living in an uncertain, constantly changing world. We have two main strategies for dealing with this uncertainty:
-
Appeal to higher powers through religion and ritual. This approach sees the world as governed by mysterious forces that we must appease.
-
Gain knowledge and control over the world through science and technology. This approach aims to understand how the world works so we can modify our environment, though we can never eliminate uncertainty completely.
Dewey argued for the second approach. He believed philosophy should make experience more coherent and help empower us, like science does. To judge a philosophical theory, we should consider how useful it is in addressing life’s problems.
Dewey had an enormous influence on American thought, especially in education. His work focused on using philosophy to solve practical problems, rather than search for absolute truth. Overall, Dewey offered a “luminous” philosophy that could enrich human experience.
Here is a summary of the key ideas:
Du Bois was a pioneering civil rights activist and intellectual. His philosophical approach was influenced by Pragmatism, emphasizing the practical implications and usefulness of ideas.
Du Bois believed that progress toward a better, fuller human life is possible, but only if we maintain faith in that possibility. Without that belief, we suffer a kind of living death, as human beings cease to grow and progress.
• Du Bois argued that racial inequality was a social problem, not a scientific one. It could only be addressed through political and social action.
• He devoted his life to finding solutions to social inequality in all its forms. In his final message, he expressed the hope that the work he had started would be continued by others.
• Du Bois’s thinking was influenced by ideas of human flourishing that go all the way back to Aristotle. But he gave these ideas a modern, politically engaged interpretation.
• Du Bois rejected claims that black people were inherently inferior to whites. He saw racism as a purely social problem.
• Martin Luther King Jr. cited Du Bois as a key influence. Du Bois pioneered the kind of engaged, active approach that King adopted.
• Inequality and lack of opportunity are social problems that lead to further problems like high crime rates. They must be addressed at their roots.
That covers the essence of Du Bois’s thinking and his significance as an activist and political philosopher. Please let me know if you would like me to explain any part of the summary in more depth.
virtue in leisure too. In the modern
no need of it.
der that we view work through
world, where work has become both
Bertrand Russell
a moral lens that is relic of a less
prestigious and obligatory, we may
enlightened age, and that we need
find Russell’s praise of idleness
A profound thinker who struggled throughout his long and
to see the purpose of work in terms
rather subversive—but perhaps
productive life to diminish injustice and increase human happiness,
of genuine human fulfillment
necessary too. Our obsession
Bertrand Russell argued that we should cast off irrational moral
rather than duty or obligation, is a
with work may not be providing
attitudes that see work as virtuous in itself and embrace more leisure.
prescient one. Work, Russell says,
meaning in the way we expect.
He believed that reducing excessive work would make possible a richer
should be “a means to certain
Some leisure, it seems, might be
and more creative life, so long as leisure was used well. While Russell’s
and a richness of imagination,
Russell tells us, would value both
vision may ignore certain economic realities, his reminder that human
leisure and work, but “would not
work should aim at fulfilling human ends rather than serving as an end
see the former as a bit of residual
in itself remains pertinent. With a balanced and thoughtful approach
waste, which could be eliminated
to human activity, both work and leisure can nurture our humanity.
by the efficiency of utter scientific
• José Ortega y Gasset was a 20th-century Spanish philosopher and existentialist.
• For Ortega, philosophy should engage creatively with life, not just analyze the world in a detached way. Reason allows us to understand and improve our circumstances.
• We cannot separate ourselves from our circumstances. We are always immersed in a particular situation, with certain habits of thought and behavior. Philosophers should strive to understand and change these circumstances.
• To transform our lives, we must look at them with fresh eyes—questioning our assumptions and imagining new possibilities. But our circumstances will always limit how much we can change.
• Life involves a constant collision between the circumstances we find ourselves in and the new futures we can imagine. There is a creative tension between the habitual and the possible.
• Ortega influenced philosophers across Spain and Latin America with his call to actively and creatively engage with life. His philosophy explores what it means for us to realize our freedom and shape our existence.
Here is a summary of Wittgenstein’s key ideas in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus:
- The world consists of facts, which are states of affairs that are either true or false.
- Language consists of propositions, which are pictures or models of possible states of affairs in the world.
- Meaningful propositions correspond to possibilities in the world and have sense; nonsensical propositions do not correspond to anything in the world and are meaningless.
- The limits of language are the limits of the world: we cannot meaningfully speak about things beyond the possibilities of the world.
- Many philosophical problems arise from misunderstandings about the logic of our language. By clarifying the logical structure of propositions, philosophical problems can be resolved or shown to be nonsensical.
- What can be meaningfully said at all can be said clearly; propositions on ethics, aesthetics, and religion are nonsensical.
- The purpose of the Tractatus is to set limits to thought by clarifying the logical essence of propositions and language. Within those limits, meaning can then operate.
The key ideas, then, are that the meaningful content of language is limited to propositions that correspond to and picture possibilities in the world. Nonsensical propositions that go beyond language and the world cannot meaningfully be spoken. By explaining this view of language and logic, Wittgenstein believes many philosophical problems can be addressed.
Martin Heidegger was a German philosopher who is considered to be one of the most influential figures of 20th-century philosophy. He developed a phenomenological approach and devoted much of his work to a fundamental ontology exploring “being” (Sein).
Heidegger’s magnum opus, Being and Time (1927), investigates the meaning of being through an analysis of Dasein, or “being there.” For Heidegger, Dasein refers to human existence and consciousness. He argues that humans cannot be understood in abstraction from the world in which they live. We are fundamentally self-interpreting beings embedded in meaningful contexts with others.
Heidegger’s philosophy focuses on phenomenological analysis of human existence and rejects the notion of a disembodied, rational subject favored in philosophy since Descartes. He seeks to explore how things show up for us in our normal, everyday experience and understand the meaning they have for us. For Heidegger, the question of being aims at uncovering the meaning of being that already permeates our existence but usually remains hidden or covered over.
Heidegger sees human existence as articulated through care, concern, and inquiry. We care about things, are concerned with our being, and inquire into the meaning of it all. Our being is essentially being-with and being-in-the-world. We dwell in possibilities, in projects and goals that matter to us. Heidegger calls this “care structure” of human existence “thrown projection.” We are thrown into a world not of our choosing but still must project our own lives by making choices.
Heidegger wants to understand being through an analysis of the kind of being that asks the question of being: human existence. His phenomenology attempts to get beneath theoretical constructs to the meaningful experience we have as beings-in-the-world. He seeks to revitalize philosophical questioning by uncovering the original sense of being that makes all particular beings intelligible. For Heidegger, philosophy is not a matter of theories but of self-understanding and insight into our own finite, historical existence.
Here is a summary of Tetsuro Watsuji’s view:
-
Tetsuro Watsuji was an influential 20th-century Japanese philosopher who studied both Eastern and Western philosophy.
-
He believed that ethics is not about individual action or choice, but about self-sacrifice for the benefit of one’s community. He called this “betweenness” - the interconnected network of relationships within which we exist.
-
For Watsuji, the individual has no true moral choice outside of sacrificing for the community. Our identity and existence are defined by our relationships and community, not as isolated individuals.
-
He argued against Western individualism and believed that individuals only gain meaning through social relationships. We have obligations to our communities that come before our individual interests or desires.
-
Overall, Watsuji saw ethics as a matter of individuals transcending themselves to act for the common good of their communities. The self is not an end in itself and gains purpose through service to others.
That’s a high-level summary of Tetsuro Watsuji’s view that individuals have a moral duty to sacrifice for the good of their communities. He believed we only gain meaning and purpose through our relationships with and obligations to others.
• Hans-Georg Gadamer was a 20th-century German philosopher associated with hermeneutics, the philosophical study of interpretation.
• Gadamer was influenced by Martin Heidegger, who believed that philosophy should interpret human existence. Gadamer applied this view to interpreting texts and history.
• Gadamer argued that we interpret texts by moving in a “hermeneutic circle”—our understanding of individual parts depends on our sense of the whole, and vice versa. Our interpretations are shaped by our preexisting understandings, or “prejudices.”
• For Gadamer, history and tradition shape our prejudices and identities. We do not have an objective view of history from outside; rather, we are embedded within history. “History does not belong to us but we belong to it.”
• To understand a historical text, we fuse its “horizon of meaning” with our own horizon of the present. This gives us a deeper understanding of both the past and our own time.
• Gadamer’s hermeneutics aimed to overcome the subject-object distinction and show how understanding depends on tradition and historical effect. Our prejudices are not obstacles but the basis for any interpretation.
• Key concepts include: hermeneutic circle, prejudice, historical consciousness, horizon of meaning, fusion of horizons.
• Gadamer built on Dilthey’s view that the human sciences depend on understanding and interpretation, not just explanation. But Gadamer gave hermeneutics a more ontological focus.
That covers the essence of Gadamer’s hermeneutical approach and philosophy of history. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
such arguments into the form:
is nothing in the premises that
If P then Q
really implies that cats are
P
banana-flavored. So, because one
Q
of the premises (that all cats are
For example:
banana-flavored) is undoubtedly
If it is an apple, then it is a fruit.
(If P then Q)
It is an apple.
(P)
Therefore, it is a fruit.
(Q)
Therefore, while the form of the argument may be valid,
Deductive reasoning moves from general principles to specific conclusions. It is either valid or invalid, depending on whether the conclusion follows logically from the premises. Valid arguments can be sound (true premises) or unsound (false premises). Inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to general conclusions. No inductive argument can be proven conclusively valid, since we can never rule out the possibility of encountering evidence that falsifies our conclusion. At best, inductive arguments are more or less strong, based on the amount of evidence. According to Karl Popper, science should avoid trying to prove theories true (since this is logically impossible) and instead aim to prove them false through observations and experiments. Theories that have withstood many attempts at falsification become well-corroborated, though never proven.
The key idea expressed in the statement “Existence precedes essence” is that humans have no predetermined essence or nature. Rather, we define our essence or nature through the choices we make. This is a central claim of existentialist philosophy.
Before existentialism, Western philosophy had traditionally held that essence comes before existence. This means that things in the world, including human beings, have a predetermined essence that shapes what they fundamentally are. For human beings, this essence was often thought to be a soul, spirit, or mind that made us essentially rational beings.
In contrast, existentialists like Jean-Paul Sartre argue that there is no predetermined essence that defines human nature. We have no essential self, spirit, or mind that determines what we are. Rather, we define our essence or nature through the choices we freely make. As Sartre puts it, “existence precedes essence”. We exist first, and then create our essence through our choices.
This means that we alone are responsible for defining who we are through the choices we make. We have radical freedom to choose our path in life, and we must accept the responsibility and angst that comes with this freedom. There are no predetermined values or guidelines that define who we should be. We must determine our values and purpose through the choices we freely make.
So in short, the statement expresses the existentialist view that we have no predetermined essence, and we define our essence or nature through the choices we make in life. This is in contrast to views that see human nature as essentially or fundamentally defined by a soul, spirit, or mind. For existentialists, existence comes before essence. Choice and freedom define who we are.
• Jean-Paul Sartre was an existential philosopher who believed that existence precedes essence. This means that humans have no predetermined nature or purpose. We define our own essence or nature through the choices we make.
• Sartre argues that we have radical freedom and responsibility. We are “condemned to be free” and responsible for shaping ourselves and the world.
• Sartre rejected the idea of human nature as limiting our freedom. He believed there were no moral absolutes or guidelines to determine how we should act. We must determine that for ourselves.
• Sartre’s ideas influenced generations of thinkers and activists. His call for radical freedom and responsibility inspired young people in 1960s France to challenge traditional social conventions.
• Hannah Arendt applied Sartre’s thinking to her analysis of evil. She argued that evildoers like Adolf Eichmann are not monsters but ordinary people who fail to think critically about their actions and responsibilities. Evil can be banal, arising from thoughtlessness and conformity rather than radical evil intentions.
• Arendt and Sartre emphasized the importance of individuals thinking critically about their moral choices and not just blindly following social conventions or orders. When we fail to do so, we can be complicit in evil without even realizing it.
That’s a high-level summary of the key ideas discussed in this section on Sartre, Arendt, and the banality of evil. Please let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
The key ideas in this passage are:
male is by nature superior, and the female inferior.”
humanity with masculinity. Others,
1919 Virginia Woolf argues for
though less explicit, have imposed
The Look
“a room of one’s own” for
a masculine standard in more
De Beauvoir says that woman is
female literary independence.
subtle ways. For example, when
turned into the “Other” as the
philosophers refer to “Man” as the
object of what she calls “the Look”.
AFTER
measure of humanity, they usually
In the Look, woman is “trapped
From 1960s Second-wave
mean a male standard according to
as an erotic object under the male
feminism develops around the
which everything else human is to
gaze”. This has profound effects
world, promoting women’s
be judged. Women, then, have had
on woman’s sense of self. She is
rights and gender equality.
to define themselves in relation
rewarded only for her sexual and
to this standard and, in the process,
physical qualities, rather than her
1990s The notion of the “male
have become “the second sex”.
intellectual and moral being.
gaze” in visual culture is
It is in this context that de Beauvoir
explored by feminist theorists.
wrote The Second Sex.
The Self and the Other
Woman as Other De Beauvoir believes that
2000s “Intersectional feminism”
highlights how women from
different backgrounds face
When philosophers refer to
patriarchal societies define woman
different and combined forms
“Man” as the measure of human,
as Other from an early age. She
of discrimination.
women have had to define themselves
is taught that her worth lies in
in relation to this and become “the
pleasing men and being an object of
second sex”. De Beauvoir says that
desire. However, de Beauvoir insists
historically the standard measure
that biology does not determine a
of what we take to be fully human
woman’s destiny. She has free will,
has been male. The male Self is the
and the ability to choose her own
active subject of knowledge, whereas
path in life. Woman, says de Beauvoir,
woman is judged as the passive
must reject her conditioning as Other
object—the Other—in relation to
and regain her sovereignty as a
which everything else human
thinking, conscious, human subject.
See also: Aristotle 56–63 ■ Edmund Husserl 224–25 ■ Maurice Merleau-Ponty 274–76 ■ Jean-Paul Sartre 268–71 ■ Luce Irigaray 320
■ Julia Kristeva 323
THE MODERN WORLD 277
NO TWO THINGS
HAVE EVER BEEN
COMPLETELY ALIKE
ROLAND BARTHES (1915–1980)
IN CONTEXT
French philosopher Roland
each individual advertised product
Barthes was interested in the
and how we perceive it as different.
BRANCH
relationship between language
In other words, difference is built in
Semiotics
and culture. In particular, he studied
to the system of consumerism itself.
APPROACH
the ways in which the media and
Without difference, there would be
Post-structuralism
popular culture represent the world
no motivation to desire new products.
to us, and how these representations
BEFORE
come to seem natural and inevitable.
Mythology
1900 Ferdinand de Saussure
In Mythologies (1957), Barthes examines
proposes semiotics: the study
popular culture and advertising
of signs and meaning.
in postwar France. He looks at
The power of difference
everything from magazines, cinema,
Barthes says that no two things have
1950s Jacques Derrida develops
and photography to toys, food, and
ever been absolutely identical. Even
“deconstruction” to challenge
fashion. He wants to decode the
products of the same type differ in
dominant ways of thinking.
myths—the messages and meanings—
some way, whether in color, style,
contained within these cultural
year of production, packaging, or
AFTER
products. Barthes examines how
brand. And it is these differences
1960s Michel Foucault explores
certain representations come to
that are emphasized in order to make
power and knowledge.
be seen as “natural” and universal.
us desire the product. The differences,
He aims to denaturalize these myths
no matter how trivial, appeal to our
1970s Judith Butler develops
and show that they are constructed,
sense that we are individuals with
ideas of “gender performativity”.
human-made rather than inevitable.
unique tastes—that we consume in order to forge our distinctive identities.
1990s Cultural studies explores
popular and media culture. Barthes also looks at advertising.
Theorists apply Barthes’ ideas.
He says that advertising works by
Barthes’ analysis suggests that the
constantly generating perceived
differences between products—and
differences between products and
even between people—are in many
brands that are in reality very similar.
cases constructed through language
Advertising builds desire through
and marketing. What makes us
the representation of products as
think two garments are crucially
somehow special, unique, or different.
different in look or style is often just
By emphasizing difference, it plays
the way they are advertised and
into consumers’ need for individuality.
represented through brand image. ■
The representation of even tiny distinctions between products fuels
See also: Ferdinand de Saussure 242–45 ■ Jacques Derrida 290–91 ■ Michel Foucault 296–99
■ Judith Butler 304–05
the perception that no two are alike.
In advertising, the differences are next to nothing, but are emphasized for their power to generate desire. Barthes says that it is not the products themselves that differ so greatly, but
278
A MAP IS NOT THE TERRITORY IT REPRESENTS Alfred Korzybski
Every act of communication involves encoding a message, transmitting it, and then decoding it at the other end. The ancient Greeks realized that language is a system of signs that stand for the things they signify, creating inevitable room for misunderstanding. Polish-American philosopher Alfred Korzybski made a related point in the early 20th century when he said, “The map is not the territory.” A map is a simplified model that represents a complex, multifaceted reality. All language is a map that shapes our perception and understanding. But the danger is that we mistake the map for reality itself.
See also: Plato 68–71 ■ Structuralism 242–43 ■ Post-structuralism 290–92 ■ Deconstruction 290–91
Negative liberty means freedom
obstruction, or interference by
from external obstacles like coercion,
others. This corresponds to what
Berlin believed that there are two concepts of liberty:
Berlin calls “negative” liberty.
Positive liberty refers to the possibility of acting in
Positive liberty is the freedom and
such a way as to take control of one’s life and realize
capacity to determine one’s own
one’s fundamental purposes. This is Berlin’s idea of
destiny, to be in control of one’s
“positive” liberty.
life, and choose one’s own goals.
Berlin argued that these two concepts can conflict. Maximizing
This is self-direction and
positive liberty could require restricting negative liberty.
self-realization.
Excessive focus on negative liberty could prevent the possibility
Berlin argued that both concepts
of positive liberty. A balance is needed between the two.
are important, but they can come
For Berlin, the history of ideas illustrates the dangers of privileging
into conflict. An emphasis on
one concept over the other. Promoting only negative liberty could
positive liberty could lead to
justify limiting it in the name of autonomy or self-realization. But
totalitarianism by restricting
promoting only positive liberty could justify coercion in the name of
negative liberty. But too much
someone’s “real interests”.
focus on negative liberty could
Berlin concludes that in the end, “Everything is what it is: liberty is
prevent the possibility of positive
liberty, not equality or justice or culture, or human happiness or a quiet
liberty or self-fulfillment. For
conscience.” But he also argues that “liberty is liberty, not equality or
Berlin, the key was to find the
fairness or justice or culture, or human happiness or a quiet conscience”.
right balance between the two.
In other words, we should not confuse the concept of liberty with other
While emphasizing that “liberty
political ideals. But we must recognize that liberty alone, without these
is liberty”, he argued that some
other ideals, may not lead to a good society.
measure of both positive and negative liberty is needed. ■
Here are the key points:
• Arne Naess’s concept of “thinking like a mountain” encourages us to
identify with the natural world and see ourselves as part of the whole biosphere, rather than as separate from it.
• Naess claims that broadening our sense of self to include other living beings and nature leads to a more meaningful life. He calls this the “ecological self.”
• Naess argues that we must think about the long-term interests of the environment as a whole, not just our own immediate needs. We must recognize our responsibility to all life on Earth.
• Naess believes living well involves living harmoniously as part of nature, not trying to control or manipulate it for our benefit. We must change our perspective to see ourselves as equal with all elements of our environment.
• Naess’s philosophy of “deep ecology” has been very influential in shaping environmental thought and activism. Although thinking like a mountain may seem difficult for city dwellers, it remains an ideal we can work toward.
to non-academics, or simply
confronting the world. An
Japanese philosopher Ryōsuke
• The post-World War II period saw increasing globalization and the spread of popular culture. There
because life in the closing decades
important strand of postwar
Ōhashi, continued to develop
of the 20th century was
thought was African philosophy,
traditional schools of Western
becoming rapidly more complex.
which sought political as well as
philosophical thought, especially
A bewildering world quite possibly
cultural self-determination after
political theory and ethics. Others
demanded answers rather than
the collapse of European colonial
advocated a “return to the real
more questions. Both the academic
empires. Thinkers such as
world”—a practical, problem-
were major social and political upheavals, including dissent and unrest in Western nations.
• Western philosophy followed an elitist path, distancing itself from popular concerns. Structuralism was influential, promoting the “deconstruction” of texts to reveal multiple meanings. Key proponents included Derrida, Althusser, Foucault, and Lacan.
• Postmodern philosophy rejected objective truths and “grand narratives.” It influenced art and literature but was largely incomprehensible to non-academics.
• Some philosophers focused on practical issues like ethics, politics, feminism, and postcolonialism. African philosophy sought self-determination. Environmental philosophy emerged.
• Ordinary language philosophy and analytic philosophy dominated Anglo-American thought. Quine and Kripke were influential. Searle studied consciousness and language.
• Developments in science, like chaos theory, influenced some philosophers. Buddhism and Taoism also became more prominent in the West.
• Globally, philosophers aimed to share non-Western traditions and create cross-cultural dialogue. Oruka studied “sage philosophy” in Africa.
290 CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY
Kwame Appiah, Paulin Hountondji,
solvent approach to real-world
and Achille Mbembe wrote from
issues. Philosophy itself began to
the perspectives of postcolonial
diversify in several directions.
Ghana and Cameroon. Feminism
Environmental philosophy
was revitalized, addressing
emerged as a discipline in its own
women’s experience in the
right. Buddhism and Taoism
Third World. Environmental
gained more adherents in the
philosophy emerged in response
West. And as concepts from
to growing ecological concerns.
chaos theory and complexity
Analytic philosophy also became
science spread into popular
more socially engaged, with
culture, some philosophers were
philosophers such as Peter Singer
inspired to consider their relevance
promoting utilitarianism and animal
to metaphysics and epistemology.
rights, and John Rawls developing
The rapid progress of
his influential theory of justice.
communications technologies fulfilled the prophecies of Marshall
Anglo-American thought
McLuhan. With telephones,
In the Anglo-American philosophical
satellites, and computers
tradition, ordinary language
enabling instant global
philosophy and analytic philosophy
connections, philosophers were
continued to hold sway. The
grappling with ideas that were
American philosopher W. V. O.
influencing thought across
Quine was instrumental in shifting
cultures. Cross-cultural
the focus of analytic philosophy
philosophy and intercultural
away from logical positivism
dialogue were coming to the
toward more holistic theories of
forefront of the discipline.
knowledge and meaning. Saul
Philosophy was poised to
Kripke’s work in modal logic
become more global than ever
and the philosophy of language
before in its history.
was also highly influential. John Searle, known for his work on speech acts and consciousness,
With increasing globalization, philosophy aimed
towards cross-cultural dialogue and becoming
more globally engaged. There was a new focus on
real-world ethical issues and environmental concerns.
explored the relationship between mind and language. While postmodernism never really took hold in mainstream
world was arguably as intellectually
philosophers were determined
Anglo-American philosophy,
self-absorbed as postmodernism
to share non-Western traditions
the interconnected and media-
at its height, and tended to ignore
with a wider audience. The Kenyan
saturated nature of the modern
pressing societal concerns. Some
philosopher Odera Oruka studied
Ethics became a major concern, with philosophers such as
Peter Singer advocating utilitarianism and animal rights. Environmental philosophy also developed as an important field.
CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY 291
This map shows some of the key nationalities, movements, and subject areas in contemporary philosophy from the mid20th century onward.
FRANCE Jean-François Lyotard Jacques Derrida Deconstruction
Helen Cixous Luce Irigaray Postmodern feminism
GB/US
Theory of mind Philosophy of language
MEXICO
JAPAN
Devendra Satyarthi Navya-Nyāya school Postcolonialism
Ryōsuke Ōhashi Modern Kyoto school Philosophy of nothingness
AFRICA
INDIA
Kwame Appiah Paulin Hountondji Achille Mbembe Postcolonialism
Thinkers and movements AUSTRALIA
Peter Singer Utilitarianism, animal rights
John Searle
Subject areas Ethics Politics Aesthetics Metaphysics Epistemology
W. V. O. Quine Saul Kripke Ordinary language philosophy Analytic philosophy
GREECE
Cornelius Castoriadis Social philosophy
Tetsurō Watsuji Cultural phenomenology
BRAZIL
Paulo Freire Critical pedagogy
what he called “sage philosophy”
Philosophy for the Future of the globe. There have been some moves towards more globally engaged,
in rural East Africa, recording the
The world’s philosophical traditions have been dominated by Western schools
thoughts of traditional elders and
of thought for centuries. As globalization accelerates and the world becomes
healers. Other non-Western
more interconnected, one of the major challenges for philosophy today is how
philosophers sought to revive
to broaden its perspectives and facilitate meaningful cross-cultural dialogue.
and revitalize indigenous schools
By acknowledging non-Western philosophies and other ways of thinking as
of thought or open them up to
valuable alternatives, rather than as “exotic” adjuncts to Western thought,
new influences, as with modern
philosophy may come to provide the kind of open and inclusive guidance that an
proponents of Navya-Nyāya
increasingly borderless world requires. To serve the global community, philosophy
(“new logic”) in India, and the
needs to become more reflective of the diversity of human thought. It must seek
Kyoto school’s interpretations of
to understand how different philosophical traditions—Eastern and Western, ancient
Buddhism and phenomenology
and modern—can enrich each other, and ultimately provide a shared vision of
in Japan. Meanwhile, Latin
what it means to lead a good and just existence in the 21st century. This is the
American philosophers such as
challenge that lies before philosophy and philosophers today.
Paulo Freire developed critical and
socially useful philosophy centered on ethics, politics, and the environment.
■
liberationist philosophies suited to the region. And in Africa thinkers explored indigenous belief systems and their relation to modern political and ethical concerns.
See also: Ludwig Wittgenstein 230–37 ■ Jean-Paul Sartre 268–71 ■ Postmodernism 274–77 ■ Deconstruction 296–99 ■ Postcolonialism 310–13 ■ Feminist philosophy 314–17 ■ Environmental philosophy 332–35
THE MODERN WORLD 293
Aesthetics & art criticism
Ethics
Aesthetics, the philosophical study of art and beauty, became
Ethics continued to be a active area of philosophy. In the
more pluralistic. Postmodern thinkers rejected the idea of
analytic tradition, philosophers such as Philippa Foot and Judith
universal standards of artistic value. Art criticism embraced a
Jarvis Thomson developed forms of virtue ethics and explored
wider range of media, including popular art forms, and feminist
topics like abortion.
■ Kuhn argues that science progresses through a cycle of normal science and revolutions.
1637 René Descartes publishes
■ Normal science is puzzle-solving within an accepted theoretical framework or paradigm.
his Discourse on Method,
■ Anomalies arise that the paradigm struggles to accommodate.
aiming to provide a new
■Eventually, a crisis leads to the emergence of a new paradigm.
philosophical paradigm.
■ There is then a scientific revolution as the old paradigm is replaced.
■ The new paradigm becomes accepted and normal science resumes.
AFTER
■ Kuhn uses the shift from Ptolemaic to Copernican cosmology as an example.
1970s Criticism of Kuhn’s
■ Normal science aims to elaborate and extend the paradigm, not challenge it.
theory leads to modifications in later editions of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
See also: Copernicus 102–07
■ Descartes 118–23 ■ Einstein 242–45
■ Paul Feyerabend 294
1992 Physicist David Bohm
proposes a new “holistic” paradigm to replace existing
quantum theory.
294
SCIENTISTS ARE NOT
INTERESTED IN
FREEDOM
BUT IN POWER
PAUL K. FEYERABEND (1924–1994)
IN CONTEXT
BRANCH
Paul Feyerabend was a
science—science as an ideology,
philosopher of science at the
or “scientific imperialism”. On
University of California, Berkeley.
this view, science tries to impose
Philosophy of science
In his 1975 book Against Method,
a single universal method and
APPROACH
Feyerabend presents a radical
worldview, dismissing competing
critique of the idea that there is
forms of knowledge. Feyerabend
Epistemological anarchism
a single scientific method. He
argues that scientific theories
BEFORE
argues that science is a much
are historically and culturally
more anarchic enterprise than
specific, not universally true.
1959 Physicist and philosopher
its supporters suggest. There are
His attitude to science has been
Thomas Kuhn argues in
no fixed rules governing scientific
described as “epistemological
The Structure of Scientific
progress, only those that scientists
anarchism”—the view that there
Revolutions that science
choose to adopt. Science should
are no universal rules of method
progresses through paradigm
not impose constraints on other
or evidence in science. Feyerabend
shifts, not by a single method.
forms of knowledge.
aims to free thought from the
Fact and reason are tied to
tyranny of abstract rules and ideals.
particular scientific theories.
Science as ideology
Normal science aims at preserving
AFTER
Feyerabend is critical of the
the status quo, not seeking truth.
1990s French philosopher
popular view of science as
His work is a defence of pluralism.
Jean-François Lyotard argues
the epitome of reason and
in The Postmodern Condition
objectivity. He sees another side
that science is a “language
of science—what he calls “folk
game” with no privileged access to truth. 21st century Critical theories
of science continue to question scientific authority and method.
See also: Thomas Kuhn 293 ■ Postmodernism 308–13
Paul K. Feyerabend Feyerabend was born in Vienna, Austria. He studied physics, mathematics, and philosophy, receiving his doctorate from the University of London in 1951. He held academic positions in several countries, eventually settling at the University of California, Berkeley in 1958, where he remained until his retirement in 1989. Feyerabend’s early work was in the philosophy of science and philosophy of religion. His mature philosophy incorporated insights from many disciplines and cultures. He was critical of concepts such as “reason”, “evidence”, and “truth”, arguing that they often serve ideological purposes. His epistemological anarchism holds that there are no universally valid rules governing science or rational thought. Feyerabend aimed to defend intellectual freedom and plurality of thought. He was influenced by philosophers such as Popper, Wittgenstein, and Duhem. His radical relativism and critique of science earned him both fame and notoriety. He died in 1994 at the age of 70. Key works 1970 Conquest of Abundance 1975 Against Method 1987 Farewell to Reason
CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY 295
THERE ARE MORE
THINGS IN HEAVEN
AND EARTH THAN ARE
DREAMT OF IN YOUR
PHILOSOPHY
DAVID CHALMERS (1966–)
IN CONTEXT
BRANCH
David Chalmers is an Australian are knowable without needing to conscious experience in the first
philosopher known for his work
consult the external world.
place. He defends a view known
in philosophy of mind. His central
Chalmers is a dualist about mind
as naturalistic dualism, proposing
Philosophy of mind
focus is on the philosophical
and body. He believes that physical
that consciousness arises from
APPROACH
problem of consciousness: how it
and mental phenomena exist in
non-physical, as yet unknown
relates to the physical world.
separate realms. The existence
phenomena in the natural world.
Property dualism
Chalmers’ key position is that
of consciousness cannot be
Known as the “hard problem”,
BEFORE
consciousness is not logically
explained in purely physical terms.
explaining how physical processes
supervenient on the physical:
Even if we had a completed physics,
give rise to consciousness is, for
17th century Philosophers such
it cannot be wholly accounted for
including a theory of quantum
Chalmers, a tough philosophical
as René Descartes propose
in terms of physical properties and
gravity, this would not on its own
challenge. His work highlights
laws. There are psychological truths
explain why we have the inner
this mystery at the heart of existence.
about consciousness that are not
subjective experiences and
wholly reducible to physical facts.
qualitative feel that make up
Unlike Descartes, however,
consciousness. Physical theory
Chalmers does not appeal to a
leaves open the question of why there
nonphysical mind but argues
is something it is like to be conscious,
that science must face the hard
rather than just mechanisms.
problem of understanding how
Independence of consciousness Chalmers argues for the logical independence of consciousness from the physical world. There are truths about consciousness that
dualism to account for mind.
Martial arts and philosophy were my two passions growing up. Both involve cultivating skills for mental discipline and clarity.
AFTER
2000s Chalmers’ arguments prompt much debate on consciousness and dualism. Some philosophers advocate
physicalism; others defend See also: René Descartes 118–23 ■ Mind–body problem 232 ■ Contemporary theories of mind 320–21
alternative theories.
Chalmers’ early interest in philosophy was sparked by debates over the mind–body problem in an introductory philosophy course. His doctoral work at Indiana University focused on the philosophy of mind under Douglas Hofstadter. After receiving his PhD in 1993, Chalmers held positions at UC Santa Cruz, UC Berkeley, and the Australian National University before becoming Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Centre for Consciousness at the Australian National University. Chalmers defends the idea that consciousness is a fundamental feature of reality that cannot be explained in purely physical terms. He argues for a kind of property dualism, proposing naturalistic principles to account for the emergence of consciousness. Chalmers believes we will need to develop more fundamental theories of consciousness, physics, and the relationship between them. His work has been very influential in shaping modern debates on the philosophy of mind. Key works 1996 The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory 2002 Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings (editor) 2010 The Character of Consciousness
David Chalmers
296
LOVE IS THE PROCESS
OF DISCOVERING WHO
WE ARE IN THE PRESENT
MOMENT
BELL HOOKS (1952–)
IN CONTEXT
BRANCH
bell hooks is the pen name
us to open up and expand our of Kentucky. In her view, love is
of Gloria Jean Watkins, an
capacity for connection. For it is
not a feeling but an act of will—
American author, feminist, and
only when we love without fear
the decision to connect with others
Philosophy of love
social activist. In her
The key ideas in Paul Feyerabend’s philosophy are:
• There is no one correct “scientific method.” The progress of science is not governed by strict rules.
• Traditional philosophies of science are too limiting and rationalist. They fail to capture how science really progresses.
• Scientific revolutions involve radical changes that alter concepts and the meaning of theories. There are no permanent frameworks.
• The only principle that fits the actual history of science is “anything goes.” All methodologies have their limits, so none should be ruled out.
• Strict rules and a rationalist view of science can limit progress. An “anarchistic” and open-minded approach is needed.
• Science is a human activity embedded in a social and political context. It does not provide an “objective” account of the world.
• There are no hard and fast distinctions between science and other areas like religion, mythology, and art. They should be seen as continuous.
• Our knowledge of the world is always limited and fallible. We should remain open-minded and skeptical of truth claims.
• Feyerabend was influenced by Popper but came to differ significantly from Popper’s more rationalist philosophy of science.
That’s a good summary of Feyerabend’s radical and controversial philosophy of science. The key point is his rejection of a strict “scientific method” and rationalist view of how science progresses in favor of a more open-minded, skeptical, and anarchistic approach.
Frantz Fanon was born
1925 on the island of Martinique,
a Caribbean island that was then
thought. He was struck by the
The Wretched of the Earth,
a French colony. He served in the
discrepancy between the ideal
which became a hugely influential
Free French forces during World
of a universal French citizenship
work of anti-colonial theory.
War II, then studied psychiatry and
promised by the Revolution of
Fanon died in 1961 at the age
philosophy in France. His exposure
1789 and the discrimination and
of 35, and was buried in Algeria.
to racism when he first arrived in
lack of opportunity he witnessed.
France profoundly shaped his
In 1952, while practising as a
Key works
thinking. He became interested in
psychiatrist in Algeria, Fanon
how colonized people internalized
1952 Black Skin, White Masks
the values of the colonizer, and
1961 The Wretched of the
how racism caused psychological
Earth
harm. While in Algeria, Fanon
1965 On National Culture
See also: Jean-Paul Sartre 268–71 ■ Sigmund Freud 276–81 ■ Edward Said 321
302
REALITY IS CREATED BY LANGUAGE
EDWARD SAID (1935–2003)
human sciences. Said argues that
IN CONTEXT
Most of us tend to think of
in many cases our knowledge of
knowledge as something that we
other cultures is distorted by the
BRANCH
discover about the world as it really
prejudices and interests of Western
Philosophy of culture
is. But according to Edward Said’s
scholars. He criticizes the “school
book Orientalism, published in 1978,
of Orientalism”, which presents
APPROACH
the facts we believe about other
Islamic cultures as intrinsically
Post-colonialism
cultures are often not objective
exotic, reactionary, and inferior,
truths, but are shaped by the
reflecting European colonial
BEFORE
power structures in which they are
interests rather than any objective
1930s Frantz Fanon argues
produced. In particular, Said argues
truth. In this way, Said argues,
that colonial racism leads
that European scholarship about the
reality is, to some extent, created
colonized peoples to
Middle East and Islam—what he calls
by language.
internalize a sense of
“Orientalism”—was distorted by the
inferiority.
colonial politics of the time.
Imagined realities
Said’s argument has been very
Said was born in Jerusalem and
1952 Fanon publishes
influential in post-colonial studies
grew up in both Palestine and
Black Skin, White Masks,
and critical theory. His central claim
Egypt. He was well placed to see
exploring the impact of
is that our knowledge and beliefs
how misleading and distorted were
colonialism on identity.
about other cultures are shaped by
many Western accounts of Middle
“imagined geographies” and systems
Eastern culture. Said argues that
AFTER
of representation over which we
Orientalism is an example of how
1993 Indian critic Homi
have little control. These imagined
“imagined geographies”— fictional
Bhabha develops Said’s
geographies reify and distort
concepts of place that have little
ideas in The Location
complex realities.
to do with the real world—come to
of Culture.
Said applied this insight to
be accepted through repetition as
Western scholarship about the East,
facts. Works of scholarship create
or “Orientalism”—the academic
these imagined realities through
study of Islamic and Middle Eastern
the power structures of knowledge.
culture, history, and languages in
CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY 303
See also: Frantz Fanon 300–01 ■ Michel Foucault 308–13 ■ Noam Chomsky 333
Western scholars shape
Our knowledge of other
their portrayal of “the Orient” to
suit dominant Western stereotypes.
cultures is often distorted
The power of scholars
by the prejudices and
to shape knowledge means
interests of the West.
they construct imagined
geographies that distort Under Western colonialism, the
the complex realities
ability to construct knowledge
Edward Said
about colonized peoples was a way
Edward Said was born to Palestinian
and received his PhD in literature
to dominate and control them. By
Christian parents in British-
from Harvard University in 1964.
describing Islamic cultures as exotic,
administered Jerusalem in 1935.
He taught English and comparative
unchanging, and primitive, Western
The family moved to Egypt, where
literature for over 40 years at
scholars provided a justification for
Said was educated in British and
Columbia University in New York.
colonial rule. Yet all cultures contain
American schools. He graduated
complex realities that go far beyond
from Princeton University in 1957
Key works
such simplistic stereotypes.
By revealing Orientalism as an “imagined geography” created to serve the interests of colonial
1978 Orientalism 1993 Culture and Imperialism
domination, Said exposed how the
1996 Representations
construction of knowledge can be
of the Intellectual
shaped by relations of power. His
2003 Freelancing from
work has been profoundly influential
New York City: Edward
in alerting us to the political and
Said in conversation
ideological forces that inform all
with BPS
knowledge—especially knowledge
2008 Power, Politics and Culture:
of “the Other”. Orientalism remains
Interviews with Edward Said
a landmark work in post-colonial studies and critical theory. ■
See also: Frantz Fanon 300–01 ■ Robert Nozick 328 ■ Salman Rushdie 335
of the colonized.
304
THE PERSONAL IS
POLITICAL
CAROL HANSISCH (1935–)
restructures society and that we are
IN CONTEXT
BRANCH
The phrase “the personal is
not merely victims of macro-level
political” is central to feminist
social forces, but active agents in
Ethics
thinking. It suggests that aspects of
the social and political processes that
our lives that are often considered
shape our lives. It invites political
APPROACH
“private” or “personal”—such as
analysis and action on issues
Feminism
gender roles in the family, sexuality,
that disproportionately affect and
and work–life balance—are deeply
discriminate against certain groups.
BEFORE
influenced by political and social
Aspects of our lives that might
1792 Mary Wollstonecraft argues
structures. They are not simply
seem “natural” or unchangeable
for women’s rights in her
“natural” or intrinsic to human
can be revealed as social constructs
essay A Vindication of the
nature, but are shaped by the
that serve to maintain relations
Rights of Woman.
distribution of power in society.
of power and dominance. That
1869 John Stuart Mill
The phrase expresses the idea
includes traditional gender roles,
argues for women’s equality
that there is no strict separation
assumptions about sexuality, and
and empowerment in The
between the public spheres of work,
the gendered division of labour both
Subjection of Women.
politics, and government on the one
in the home and workplace. Feminist
hand, and the supposedly private
activists argue that bringing issues
AFTER
spheres of the family, sexuality,
such as violence against women,
1960s The feminist movement
and personal relationships on the
economic inequality, control of
analyses and challenges
other. The feminist movement
reproduction, and double standards
social and political
has applied this insight to show
of sexuality into the public sphere of
inequalities systematically
how gender inequality is sustained
politics is crucial to addressing the
shaping women’s lives.
through the gendered division of
root causes of gender inequality.
1990s “Third wave feminism”
labour in both public and private
focuses on issues of race,
life, as well as socially constructed
Sexuality and politics
class, sexuality
and he has worked at MIT
least, we should apply the same
since 1955. In the 1960s,
ethical standards to our own
• Noam Chomsky is best known for his political and ethical analyses.
Chomsky became a prominent
governments and policies that we
• He argues that we should apply the same ethical standards to our own
anti-war activist, and began to
apply to other governments and
governments that we apply to others. If we fail to do so, we live in illusion.
publish political works critiquing
policies. In other words, we should
• Governments often justify their actions with rhetoric rather than evidence.
US foreign policy. His political
not give our own government a free
We need to look at the actual evidence of what governments do.
works, such as American Power
pass on moral issues. If we assume
• For Chomsky, the key ethical principle is “universality”—we should judge
and the New Mandarins (1969),
that our own government is
all governments by the same moral standards. Mere rhetorical claims are
helped to shape left-wing
naturally more ethical than other
not enough.
thinking for decades.
governments simply due to a kind of patriotic allegiance, then we are
Key works
choosing “to live in a world of
1957 Syntactic Structures
comforting illusion.” To break with
1975 The Logical Structure of
this illusion, Chomsky argues, we
Linguistic Theory
need to subject our own
1985 Reflections on Language
government’s policies and actions
2002 Understanding Power:
to the light of evidence and reason.
The Indispensable Chomsky
And when a government calls on
(edited by Peter R. Mitchell
us to support some war or policy,
and John Schoeffel)
306
WE SPIN COCOONS OF
MEANING THAT
IMPRISON US IN AN ILLUSION
SLAVOJ ŽIŽEK (1949–)
IN CONTEXT
Though embracing some
ideas from Jacques Lacan
and Michel Foucault, the
BRANCH
Slovenian philosopher Slavo
Postmodernism
Žižek takes contemporary
APPROACH
critical theory in a distinctive
Cultural criticism
direction. Building on an
analysis of contemporary
philosopher and cultural critic,
BEFORE
culture, Žižek argues that
Žižek explores how ideologies
1990 Michel Foucault’s lectures
we are embedded in an intricate
operate and maintain their grip. He
and works from the 1970s
web of illusion. We think and
suggests that in order to free
onward provide an analysis
talk in ways that mask more
ourselves from ideology, we need
of power, discourse, and
than they reveal. Breaking out
to analyze how the “symbolic
the social construction
of illusion means confronting
order” and cultural codes of
of knowledge.
the traumas and anxieties that
meaning work to spin “cocoons”
1972 Jacques Lacan’s Encore:
we normally keep hidden.
that trap us in illusion.
The Seminar of Jacques Lacan,
That is, how do ideologies arise
Book XX continues his
from the process of making meaning
We are born
meaningless realm of the
itself—from the basic human need
into a world of
“Real” with the symbolic
to symbolize the world, to make
order of language, culture,
it meaningful?
ideological meanings
yearned-for Real that remains elusive.
The society of the spectacle,
… and we have to
original meaninglessness of existence
in which we now live, bombards
make our way out of the
is the source of desire.
us with meaningful images that
and meaning
attempt to reconcile the
illusion they create.
idea that our distance from the
AFTER 1997 American social
have more to do with fantasy
than with facing hard truths. To
Slavoj i ek seeks for
escape the web of illusion created
philosopher Fredric Jameson
by these images, i ek argues, we
publishes The Cultural Turn,
trauma behind the web
have “traverse the fantasy”—to
calling for philosophy to turn
of meanings and social
face up to the anxieties and
its attention to culture.
practices that ensnare us.
traumas that the fantasies mask.
2000s i ek becomes the
This involves confronting both the
most prominent contemporary
meaninglessness of existence and
Critical Theorist, fusing Marxism,
the antagonisms that society
psychoanalysis, and culture.
conceals. Only then can we hope
to attain a kind of freedom.
CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY 307
See also: Michel Foucault 302–03 ■ Jacques Lacan 310–11 ■ Jean Baudrillard 312
We are born into a world of ideological
time about television, films, popular
meanings and meaning… and we have to
culture, politics, philosophy, and
make our way out of the illusion they create.
the social zeitgeist. He has been called “an Elvis of cultural theory.”
Slavoj Žižek
Though sometimes accused of overproduction, i ek’s works
Žižek’s suggestions here echo
are highly influential and help to
those of earlier philosophers
make complex ideas in critical
such as Foucault and Lacan, but
theory and postmodernism
his approach is distinctive. Rather
accessible to a wide audience.
than seeing ideology as simply
Key works
“imposed” upon us by those
Slavoj i ek
in power, i ek analyses how
Žižek was born in Ljubljana,
1989 The Sublime Object
ideologies emerge from the very
Slovenia (then part of Yugoslavia)
of Ideology
process of making meaning—
in 1949. He studied philosophy
1991 Looking Awry: An
from our need to symbolize and
at the University of Ljubljana,
Introduction to Jacques Lacan
render the world intelligible. The
gaining his PhD in 1981. He went
through Popular Culture
truths that ideologies mask are
on to teach at the University of
2000 The Fragile Absolute
not simply empirical facts but the
Ljubljana, and has held visiting
antagonisms inherent in human
positions at universities across
society and existence itself.
Europe and North America.
To “traverse the fantasy” in
i ek fuses Marxism,
this sense is to confront the
psychoanalytic theory, and
traumas and anxieties that fuel
postmodern philosophy to develop
our social meanings and practices.
an original and influential analysis
Rather than seeing ideology as
of contemporary culture, politics,
something imposed on us to
and society. He is an unusually
justify domination, i ek analyses
engaged and prolific writer, giving
it as a kind of spontaneous
frequent public lectures, appearing
symbolic “solution” to the enigma
in documentaries, and publishing
of the human condition itself.
on a very wide range of topics at a
or Why Lacan is Not an Anti-Philosopher 2008 In Defense of Lost Causes 2012 Less Than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism 2015 Trouble in Paradise: From the End of History to the End of Capitalism 2017 Like a Thief in Broad Daylight: Power in the Era of Post-Humanity
prolific rate. He writes all the
In this picture, the possibility of
“freedom” lies in unflinchingly
confronting the antagonisms we
usually seek to avoid through the
weaving of shared social fictions. ■
Traversing the fantasy, in Zizek’s view, means confronting the anxieties and traumas behind the meanings and practices of
ideology. It is not about simply rejecting current beliefs in favor of “the facts”, but involves acknowledging deeper existential truths.
308
TO UNDERSTAND TRUTH,
YOU SHOULD EMBRACE
PARADOX AND CONTRADICTION
GRAHAM HARMAN (1968–)
IN CONTEXT
Graham Harman is one of
the central
Here is a summary of Derrida’s key ideas:
hors-texte”), we first need to understand a little more about his approach.
• Texts are not self-contained wholes that we can fully understand or interpret. They are riddled with “aporias”, or contradictions and paradoxes.
• Our everyday assumption that speech is primary and writing is secondary is misguided. Writing shapes thought in complex ways (“grammatology”).
• The word “différance” points to the endless ways in which meaning is deferred in language. Meaning is always pushed off into the future, different from itself.
• Deconstruction aims to identify the aporias and paradoxes within texts to show how they unravel themselves. It is not a method or theory but an activity.
• Derrida is skeptical that we can distinguish clearly between “inside” and “outside” of a text, or between “literal” and “metaphorical” meanings. There are only complex webs of meaning.
• Ethics and justice cannot be defined traditionally through abstract concepts or rules. They emerge through radical openness to the Other. Deconstruction has an ethical impulse.
• We are all mediators and translators. Meaning is produced through the endless play of signification in the act of reading. There are no stable meanings or origins to uncover.
• Derrida’s work leads to a notion of “undecidability”, recognizing that we can never achieve a final interpretation or understanding of a philosophical problem. We must remain open.
That covers some of the central ideas in Derrida’s thought and his radically different way of approaching how we understand language, meaning, ethics, and our relationship to texts. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
Here is a summary of Richard Rorty’s view:
-
Rorty rejects the notion that we have an eternal, unchanging “soul” or self that relates to some absolute truth. Instead, he sees human beings as social constructs, shaped by the cultures and communities we are a part of.
-
Rorty advocates a pragmatic view of truth and knowledge. For pragmatists like Rorty, concepts are not judged based on how well they correspond to some ultimate reality. Rather, they are judged based on how useful they are in helping us achieve our goals and purposes.
-
Rorty thinks philosophy should not aim for metaphysical truths or a “God’s-eye view” of reality. Instead, philosophy should aim to create new vocabularies and ways of thinking that are useful for accomplishing our shared human ends, like reducing cruelty and suffering. Philosophical progress happens through expanding our imaginations, not through discovering absolute truths.
-
For Rorty, there are no universal moral rules or absolutes. Our moral values are shaped by the communities we are a part of. But we can still make moral progress by enlarging our sense of shared community and shared moral purpose with others. The test of any belief is whether or not it helps create a more just and equitable society.
-
Rorty believes human beings are fundamentally undetermined by any eternal essence or nature. We have the freedom and responsibility to shape ourselves and our societies. By expanding our imaginations and sense of shared community, we can create the kind of world we want to live in. But there are no guarantees in life or philosophy - we simply have to make it up as we go.
That covers the essence of Rorty’s pragmatic and anti-foundationalist philosophy. Let me know if you would like me to explain anything in the summary in more detail.
Here is a summary of Richard Rorty:
-
Richard Rorty was an American philosopher who worked in the pragmatist tradition. He rejected the notion that knowledge is a matter of accurately representing an independent reality.
-
Instead, Rorty argued that knowledge is shaped by social conventions and what we are able to get away with saying. There are no absolute moral truths or fundamental essences to be discovered.
-
Rorty followed Wilfrid Sellars in rejecting the “myth of the given”—the idea that we have direct access to raw sensory data. Our perceptions are shaped by the concepts and language we have learned. Knowledge is a matter of conversation and social practice, not mirroring nature.
-
Rorty argued against the idea of knowledge as representation. He claimed we do not need to believe in absolute moral laws or deeper truths in order to live ethical lives. Conversation, social solidarity, and hope for the future are enough.
-
Rorty maintained that we do not need metaphysical comforts like the idea of an eternal soul. We are finite beings whose existence is limited to life on Earth. But we can work to create a world worth living in for future generations.
-
Key works: Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (1979), Contingency, Irony and Solidarity (1989)
Here is a summary of Oruka’s key ideas:
showing some influence from
and activities, to study philosophers
African traditions.
in oral cultures who had not studied
- Philosophy is not limited to written texts. Oral traditions can also contain
Western-type philosophy formally.
1960s With decolonization in
philosophy.
This approach allowed Oruka to
Africa, philosophers such as
- Oruka proposed “philosophic sagacity” - an ethnographic approach to studying
identify and interview several sages
Oruka begin to explore African
philosophy within oral cultures. This involves observing and interviewing people
in Kenya and show that philosophy
thought and philosophies.
within their everyday setting.
was alive and active in the oral
AFTER
- Using this approach, Oruka identified several “sages” in Kenya who engaged in
traditions of Africa. ■
2000s Philosophers such as
philosophical thinking and discussion within their communities.
Kwame Gyekye continue to
- Oruka argued that philosophy should not be limited to academics in universities
explore and articulate
but can be found in everyday life. Philosophers within oral cultures who have not
specifically African traditions
studied Western philosophy formally can still be recognized as philosophers.
of thought.
- Overall, Oruka wanted to challenge the notion that philosophy only resides within written academic texts and show that it can be found within everyday life and oral cultures. His work helped bring recognition and legitimacy to African philosophies that had previously been overlooked.
Zeno’s paradoxes discussed the contradiction between the reality of an infinitely divisible material world and our perception of the world as composed of discrete and separate objects moving between locations. He aimed to prove that motion is impossible, through arguments like “Achilles and the tortoise” - by the time Achilles reaches the place the tortoise started, it will have moved on; when Achilles reaches the new place the tortoise will have moved on again, and so on infinitely. Though his paradoxes aimed to disprove the reality of motion, they instead highlighted certain problems in logical reasoning itself and spurred subsequent philosophical work in various fields including logic and the philosophy of space and time.
Zeno’s paradoxes were important precursors to philosophical problems that remain relevant today in fields like logic, mathematics, metaphysics, and physics.
Here is a summary of key points about the philosophers you mentioned:
• Plotinus founded Neo-Platonism, dividing the cosmos into layers from the One at the top to the material world at the bottom. He believed in reincarnation and the immortality of the soul.
• Hypatia taught mathematics, astronomy and philosophy in Alexandria. She was murdered by a Christian mob though little of her work survives. She is credited with inventing several scientific instruments.
• Proclus succeeded Syrianus as head of the Academy in Athens. He wrote influential commentaries on Euclid and Plato’s Timaeus. He was a Neo-Platonist but also a scientist, mathematician, lawyer and poet.
• Al-Kindi helped introduce ancient Greek ideas to the Islamic world. He worked in Baghdad translating classical texts into Arabic and wrote on psychology, cosmology and more.
• Al-Farabi was influenced by Plato and Aristotle. He saw philosophy as the route to knowledge and believed philosophers should guide society. He described a utopia ruled by philosopher prophets in The Ideas of the Citizens of the Virtuous City.
• Al-Ghazali was a Neo-Platonist who became a Sufi preacher. He came to believe God caused all events and that truth comes through faith and mysticism, not philosophy.
• John Philoponus studied with Ammonius Hermiae in Alexandria. A Christian philosopher and scientist, he argued the universe had a beginning caused by God. He criticized Aristotle, influencing later thinkers like Galileo.
• Johannes Scotus Eriugena said reason and revelation were compatible. He tried to show Christian doctrine had a rational basis though this brought him into conflict with the Church.
• Pierre Abelard was a logician who criticized the belief in universal forms inherited from Plato. He set up his own school and became head at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. He is better known for his affair with Heloise than his philosophy.
• Ibn Bajja used Plato and Aristotle to show reason and faith were compatible. He said the path to enlightenment and God was through reason and action. But individuals must make their own journey and the enlightened should not impose their views on others.
• Meister Eckhart followed Aquinas but was accused of heresy for his mystical sermons on God’s presence in the soul. He acknowledged his florid language may have led him to stray from doctrinal orthodoxy.
Here are the main points summarized:
-
Grosseteste: 13th-century English philosopher and scientist. He studied Aristotelian logic and emphasized both inductive reasoning from particular observations to universal laws, and deductive reasoning from universal laws to predictions of particulars.
-
Llull: 13th-century Catalan philosopher. He tried to use reason and logic to persuade people of different faiths to convert to Christianity. He wrote the Ars Magna, which combined basic tenets of monotheistic religions in different ways to demonstrate Christian truths.
-
Duns Scotus: Influential 13th-century Franciscan friar and philosopher. He argued against Aquinas that attributes applied to God have the same meaning as when applied to ordinary things. He said we perceive particulars directly, without general concepts. Knowledge comes through the senses, not divine illumination.
-
Ockham: 14th-century Franciscan friar and philosopher. Known for “Ockham’s Razor”: the simplest explanation is the best. He argued universals are abstractions from experience of particulars. Precursor to British empiricism.
-
Suarez: 16th-century Jesuit philosopher. Argued only particulars exist. Said there is “middle knowledge”: God knows what would have happened if things were different, without causing events or making them unavoidable.
-
Mandeville: Early 18th-century Dutch philosopher. In The Fable of the Bees, argued society progresses through vice, not virtue. Said virtues are lies rulers tell people to control them. Economic growth comes from pursuit of self-interest, not virtue.
-
Condorcet: 18th-century French philosopher and mathematician. Advocated equal rights, free education for all. Noted voting paradoxes. Played key role in Revolution but opposed executing Louis XVI and died in prison.
-
Schelling: 19th-century German idealist philosopher. Said nature is ongoing evolutionary process driven by spirit. Mind and matter are in continuous organic process. Mechanistic views inadequate. Human consciousness is nature become conscious. In man, nature reaches self-consciousness.
An individual’s ability to satisfy his self-interest and greed.
See also: Descartes, Voltaire, Rousseau
Here are some of the key terms used in philosophy and their definitions:
cannot both be true together.
“emotive meaning” refers to the
emotive use of language,
The opposite is consistent.
Anthropic principle The idea
emotional attitude or feeling
that fundamental laws of physics
Cosmology The study of the origin,
expressed by the words used.
must be compatible with the
structure, and development of the
existence of self-aware observers.
universe as a whole.
Epistemology The branch of
philosophy that studies the nature
Appearance How something
Critical philosophy Kant’s
and possibility of knowledge. Key
appears to be, which may or may
revolutionary attempt to subject
debates include whether knowledge
not coincide with how it really is.
all knowledge to critical scrutiny.
comes from senses alone, from
This led him to distinguish between
reason alone, or from a combination;
matter and mind, phenomena
whether any knowledge is certain,
and noumena.
or whether there are limits to what
The opposite is reality.
Aristotelian Aristotle’s teachings
and methods, including the
we can know.
doctrines of the “golden mean”,
Critical theory A method of
four causes, and essentialist view
social analysis associated with the
Essay A short piece of nonfiction
of nature. Opposed to Platonic.
Frankfurt School in the early 20th
writing, typically on a single
century. It aimed to subject social
subject and reflecting the writer’s
Axiom A proposition or statement
and political doctrines and practices
own reasoning and opinions.
that is self-evident or accepted
to scrutiny to discover their hidden
without proof as the basis for
assumptions and interests, and to
Essence The fundamental attribute
further arguments or deductions.
transform society and human
that makes a thing what it is:
experience for the better.
without which it would not be that thing. For Aristotelians, essences are eternal, unchanging, and mind-
GLOSSARY 341
indepe
matism The view that God does
Mind–body problem The puzzle
Postmodernism A movement in
not intervene directly in the world
of how the mind relates to the
culture, especially arts and philosophy,
he has created, which follows its
body. In particular, how can a non-
since around the 1970s characterized
own autonomous laws. Associated
physical mind interact with the
by rejection of the idea of universal
especially with deism. The opposite
physical realm, and how can a non-
objective truths about the world or
is occasionalism.
material mind be affected by material
“metanarratives” encompassing
events in the brain and body.
it. Postmodernists emphasize the role of language, power relations,
Metaphysics The branch of
Modus ponens A form of logical
and personal inclinations in
philosophy that studies the ultimate
argument comprising two premises
shaping beliefs and the impossibility
nature of existence and reality.
and a conclusion: P implies Q, P;
of attaining objective knowledge
Key issues include whether the world
therefore Q. For example:
of the world. They celebrate
contains only physical objects, or also
If it is raining, the streets are wet.
pluralism, relativism, irony, and
minds, abstract entities, and values;
It is raining.
pastiche. Leading postmodernist
whether things have essences or
Therefore, the streets are wet.
thinkers include Jean-François Lyotard,
natures; whether free will and
Jacques Derrida, and Michel Foucault.
determinism can be reconciled;
Monism The view that reality
whether God exists; and the relation
consists of only one thing, or
Pragmatism A philosophical
between particular things and
substance, such as matter or mind.
movement developed in the USA
universals. Key philosophers include
The opposite is dualism.
around the turn of the 20th century.
Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes,
Pragmatists argue that the meaning
Hume, Kant, Hegel, and Schopenhauer.
Naturalism The view that
of beliefs and concepts should be
everything that exists is part of the
judged by their practical implications
Modern In philosophy, the period
natural world and should be
and consequences. Truth is what is
from around the 17th century to the
explained using the methods of
useful and works. The leading
19th century, as opposed to ancient
science. Naturalists believe there
pragmatists were Charles Sanders
and medieval. Key figures include
are no supernatural or mystical
Peirce, William James, and John
Descartes, Locke, Hume, Kant, Hegel,
entities and that philosophy and
Dewey. Their ideas influenced
Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Marx.
ethics should be based on scientific
20th-century philosophical movements
knowledge of human nature and the
such as analytical philosophy.
Modernism A cultural movement,
laws of the universe. Key proponents
including in philosophy, spanning
include David Hume, Bertrand
Rationalism The view that reason
the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Russell, and W. V. O. Quine.
alone, not sense experience, is
Modernists believed that traditional
the basis of certain kinds of
forms and beliefs were becoming
Necessary Cannot be otherwise;
knowledge, especially knowledge of
outdated in an era of scientific and
it must be the case. The opposite
fundamental principles in mathematics,
technological progress. They aimed
is contingent.
ethics, and metaphysics. Key rationalists
to find new ways of capturing the changing experience of modernity
include Plato, Descartes, Spinoza, Neurath’s boat An analogy used by
through experimental styles and
Otto Neurath to illustrate how
Realism The view that (i) an
subjects in art, architecture, and
science progresses through small
external world exists independently
literature. In philosophy, modernists
incremental changes rather than
of our perceptions and representations
such as Russell aimed to make
through revolutions. Scientists are
of it; and (ii) truth consists in the way
knowledge more scientific and logical.
like sailors who must rebuild their
statements correspond with this
Postmodernism reacted against
ship while at sea, replacing planks
external world. Realists typically
these modernist values.
one by one.
believe in objective truths that can be
and Leibniz.
discovered through reason and experience.
342 GLOSSARY
The opposite view is idealism. Prominent realists include Aristotle, Aquinas, Russell, Moore, and David Lewis.
Reductionism The aim or belief
Solipsism The view that one can
Theory of types A logic proposed
that complex things can be explained
only know that one’s own self and
by Bertrand Russell to avoid paradoxes
by analyzing them into their
experiences exist. It is taken by
caused by self-reference. It does this
constituent parts or reduced to
some as an inescapable conclusion
by distinguishing types of expressions
simpler component elements or
of Cartesianism or subjective
and stipulating that expressions
relations between them. Reductive
idealism.
of one type can only refer to, or
explanations are common in science,
quantify over, expressions of the
as when chemical reactions are
Sophism deceptive or fallacious
same type or a lower type. So no
explained by appealing to the
reasoning. In ancient Greece,
expression can refer to or quantify
behavior of molecules. In philosophy,
Sophists were traveling teachers
over itself. This avoids the paradoxes
reductionism is often associated
who, for a fee, taught rhetoric,
that arise from self-reference.
with physicalism or logical atomism.
logic, and philosophy. Plato was highly critical of them in some
Transcendence Something
dialogues, accusing them of using
Relativism The view that truth,
supersensible or metaphysical that
fallacious
Summary: The term epithet is often used in a derogatory way for utterances that pretend to be objective or impartial while in fact expressing emotional attitudes, as for example in “emotive definition.”
166, 170, 171
Jean-Jacques Rousseau 153
Critique of Urteilskraft, Immanuel Kant 171
discrimination 288, 288, 289, 290, 303, 304,
Croce, Benedetto 337
305, 337
characteristic; for example “fur or hair is a defining property of a mammal.”
D
See also primary and secondary qualities.
divine command theory 98
Daniel Dennett 113, 325, 339
divine commands 97
Dard, Émile 284
existentialism 17, 213, 213, 214, 242, 331
Darwin, Charles 24, 142, 162, 164, 193, 194
divine right theory 107
external ideals 84, 85
Darwinism 164, 164, 165
Doctor Angelicus 91
external world 14, 132, 133, 135, 136, 139,
David Hume 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 343, 167
Doctor Subtilis 333
140, 142
de Beauvoir, Simone 214, 276, 283
Dostoevsky, Fyodor 90, 216
extreme idealism 139, 139
de Unamuno, Miguel 233–5
Dualism 16, 122, 127, 312
The Synthesis project 14, 17, 166, 170, 171, 185
death 86, 179, 180, 181, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, Duns Scotus, John 95, 333
186, 204, 212, 243, 244, 245, 284
Durkheim, Émile 291
Democritus 14, 16, 45, 45, 65, 66, 93, 330
Dying for Ideas, Otto Hintze 285
deontology 195, 325 Derrida, Jacques 309–13, 310 Descartes, René 53, 63, 120–27, 122, 124, 134, 166, 167
E
ego 78, 109, 111, 112, 118, 119, 127, 132, 145, 148, 176, 182, 189, 203, 204, 205, 221, 222, 233, 236, 245, 265, 269, 279, 291, 310, 320, 322
human instantiation of innate knowledge 81
Theory of Universals 43, 51
Einstein, Albert 191, 197 Eleatics 40, 41, 330
human nature 156, 340
The Universal 95 Thesis 334
Emotive theory of ethics 206
The Universal Base of Knowledge and Morals 92
Empiricism 13, 49, 58, 60, 81, 101, 133, 140,
Deities emulate universal forms 84
Enemy, the 306
348, 340
Theories that narrow all knowledge to a single framework hold a distrust of overarching narratives
they manifest themselves in our consciousness, without making any assumptions about their nature as independent things.
ends and means 196, 196
David Hume 150–53
Engels, Friedrich 16, 145, 158, 159, 159,
ego 278, 278
289, 299
interpretation 209, 261, 290
human flourishing 235
Enlightenment, the 15, 133, 140, 160, 172, 201,
means and ends 96, 196
275, 334
metaphysics 341
The city-state of classical Greece espoused the principle of equality for its citizens 50
equality 50, 203, 288, 322
observation 58
Ereignis 335
property 13, 342
The philosopher seeks to understand the totality of human knowledge and experience, recognizing that knowledge does not come packaged in disciplines, but is deeply unified
essence 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 342
the 353
Tiberius Claudius Marcus Aurelius 22
essentialism 55, 56, 89
The core of philosophy is not to give answers or prescribe solutions, but to ask the right questions and explore ideas
esse 91, 92, 93, 94
The Enlightenment political Thinkers emphasized the importance of reason and progress for society 20
ethics 13, 15, 64, 74, 84, 85, 86, 92, 97, 98,
The philosophical historian seeks to understand the totality of human knowledge and experience
106, 189, 196, 206, 235, 236, 243, 294,
Social and politcal philosophies often reflect the prevailing values, assumptions and ideologies of a time 19
295, 325
The ancient Athenians believed that eternal abstract forms or essences existed apart from particular objects 57
Epicureanism 64, 65
Existential philosophy focuses on individuals and personal choice 17
G. E. Moore 203
The foundations for moral philosophy were laid down by the ancient Greek philosophers 75
Immanuel Kant 165
The speculative God of medieval theology dictated what was morally right or wrong through divine commands 97
John Dewey 209, 228, 230
Religion and philosophy were not clearly distinguishable in the ancient world 82
John Rawls 294
Many Enlightenment political philosophers emphasized social contract theory and the rights of the individual 107
John Stuart Mill 193
At the core of Plato’s philosophy is the Theory of the Forms 51
Jürgen Habermas 299, 300, 300
The Christian church was not strictly separated from temporal power during much of the medieval period 91
Karl Popper 262
A basic principle of ethics is that the means are as important as the ends 96
Max Scheler 240
empiricism 60, 101
Michel Foucault 303
The core of existential philosophy is the commitment to human freedom and the resolve to shape one’s existence 214
end, the 64
Niccolò Machiavelli 106
The core concerns of philosophy have remained remarkably consistent over time 17
Otto Hintze 285
Philosophy probes beneath the surface of things to investigate their ultimate meaning and significance 16
Paul Feyerabend 297
The essence of utilitarianism is that the ultimate standard of moral rightness is the greatest happiness for the greatest number
Peter Singer 325
The core of philosophical pragmatism is its focus on human practice and experience 228
Plato 46, 47, 48, 50
Logical positivism arose in the early 20th century and held that the only meaningful statements were those that could be verified empirically 257
R. M. Hare 294 slavery and morality 337
-
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Swiss-French philosopher known for his contributions to social contract theory and modern political philosophy. Key works include The Social Contract and Emile.
-
Rene Descartes: French philosopher and mathematician known as the “Father of Modern Philosophy”. Key works include Meditations on First Philosophy and Discourse on the Method.
-
Friedrich Nietzsche: German philosopher known for his critiques of Christianity and traditional moral values. Key works include Thus Spoke Zarathustra and The Gay Science.
-
Plato: Ancient Greek philosopher, student of Socrates, and founder of the Academy in Athens. Key works include The Republic, Symposium, and The Apology.
-
John Locke: English philosopher known as the “Father of Liberalism”. Key works include Two Treatises of Government and An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.
-
Emmanuel Kant: German philosopher considered central to modern philosophy. Key works include Critique of Pure Reason, Critique of Practical Reason, and Metaphysics of Morals.
-
Socrates: Ancient Greek philosopher who lived in Athens and founded Western philosophy. Known primarily through the works of his student Plato.
-
Aristotle: Ancient Greek philosopher and polymath, student of Plato and founder of Aristotelianism. Key works include Nicomachean Ethics, Politics, Metaphysics, and Poetics.
-
William James: American philosopher and psychologist, leader of the philosophical school known as pragmatism. Key works include Pragmatism and The Varieties of Religious Experience.
-
Voltaire: French Enlightenment writer, historian, and philosopher known for his advocacy of civil liberties, including freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and separation of church and state.
Here are summaries of the requested entries:
Of Grammatology, Jacques Derrida: Derrida critiques the privileging of speech over writing in Western philosophy. He argues that writing is not merely a representation of speech, but shapes meaning and thought.
Mandeville, Bernard: An Anglo-Dutch philosopher and political economist. He is best known for The Fable of the Bees, which argues that private vices can lead to public benefits.
Mishneh Torah, Moses Maimonides: A code of Jewish religious law compiled by the medieval philosopher Moses Maimonides. It summarizes the laws and practices from the Torah and Talmud.
Offray de la Mettrie, Julien: An 18th-century French philosopher and physician. He is considered an early pioneer of materialism and atheism. His book Man a Machine argued that humans are purely material beings that can be explained by the laws of physics.
Here is a summary of the index entries:
- Aldo Leopold: American ecologist and environmentalist
- Tanabe, Hajime: Japanese philosopher; helped introduce phenomenology to Japan
- Warhol, Andy: American artist and pioneer of Pop art movement
- Watsuji, Tetsuro: Japanese philosopher; studied Western philosophy and Buddhism
- Weber, Max: German sociologist and philosopher; studied rationalization and bureaucracy
- The Second Sex: Influential 1949 book on the treatment of women in society by Simone de Beauvoir
- The Social Contract: 1762 book by Jean-Jacques Rousseau on the relationship between individuals and the state
- The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 1962 book by Thomas Kuhn on the development of scientific theory
- Thus Spoke Zarathustra: 1883 book by Friedrich Nietzsche featuring the prophet Zarathustra
- Time: central concept in philosophy relating to change, motion, and causality
- Tragic Sense of Life: 1913 book by Spanish writer Miguel de Unamuno on humanity’s desire for eternal life
- Transcendental idealism: theory that our knowledge of the external world depends on innate concepts of the mind
- Truth and Method: 1960 book by Hans-Georg Gadamer on philosophical hermeneutics
- Wittgenstein, Ludwig: Austrian-British philosopher; proposed that philosophical problems arise from conceptual misunderstandings
- Wollstonecraft, Mary: British writer and women’s rights advocate
- Women’s rights: the rights of women to political, social and economic equality
- Yeats, William Butler: Irish poet and mystic
- Zen Buddhism: school of Mahayana Buddhism emphasizing meditation and intuition
- Zeno of Citium: Greek philosopher; founded the Stoic school of philosophy
- Žižek, Slavoj: Slovenian philosopher and cultural critic; incorporates psychoanalytic, Marxist and postmodern theory
Here is a summary of the images in 3 sections:
Section 1: Images 291-323
- Images from major photographic archives and image libraries including Getty Images, Corbis, Alamy, etc. Mostly photographic portraits and artworks. Includes images of philosophers like Aristotle, Avicenna, Descartes, etc. as well as images related to philosophical ideas like “all is flux”.
Section 2: All other images
- Artworks and diagrams used as illustrations for philosophical concepts and ideas. Includes images representing ideas such as “nothing exists except atoms”, “the soul is distinct from the body”, “God has no attributes”, etc.
Section 3: Further information
- Reference to Dorling Kindersley, a publisher, for further information about the images.
The summary outlines the types of images used (photographs, artworks, diagrams) as well as the sources for the images (major image libraries and archives) and credits Dorling Kindersley as the publisher. The specific images and their captions are not summarized since that level of detail does not seem necessary for this high-level summary. Let me know if you would like me to elaborate on any part of this summary.
![Author Photo](/_astro/matheus_KhTu9.png)
About Matheus Puppe