1 comments about On Aquinas (Wadsworth Philosophers Series).

1. I found this book very insightful and informative about Thomas Aquinas. It is interesting and not too long. I look forward to reading more books by the author.

No comments about On Augustine (Wadsworth Philosophers Series).

5 comments about Isaiah Berlin: A Life.

1. Ignatieff is at his best in his painstakingly detailed biography of that intellectual giant, Isaiah Berlin. This is how biographies should be written. Ignatieff has a wonderful ability of marrying the man and his ideas with the politics of the times he lived in. An elegantly written and honest homage to a life lived! I highly recommend this fantastic read!



2. This is a superb biography, and it also provides a very good survey of Berlin's ideas as they developed over his lifetime. That latter is no mean feat, as Berlin did not produce a highly organized corpus. Berlin's habit was to produce something, then proceed to the next thing, and never look back. He was also not very tidy in his scholarship, with a tendency to present "quotations" that are his remembered version of what the other person wrote. It is due to the extraordinary efforts of Henry Hardy that Berlin's writings having been gathered into various anthologies, with missing footnotes added, quotations cleaned up, etc.
   
   If you have tried to get into Isaiah Berlin's thought and have been discouraged by his sometimes baroque mode of exposition, I would recommend starting with Ignatieff's book. Then read around in Berlin's essays for a while and, following that, pick up "Isaiah Berlin," by John Gray, a succinct critical survey of the central themes and ideas in the man's work. At that point, you will be able to pick up anything Berlin wrote and read it with complete comprehension. Promise.



3. How can such a great book have such a low sales number? Or such a cheap price and only available used? I found it new for less than $4 in a book store during Christmas break in Cape May, NJ. Of all the books I was reading this one grabbed my attention and was most frequently the one I chose to read until I finished it. Gems! This book is loaded with them. Getting to know Sir Isaiah Berlin has been wonderful. An example: Teaching in an American University in January 1949 "His students didn't seem to know how to read or write, at least `not as these activities are understood at our best (British) universities'." (p. 190) His course was at Harvard! Now I can't feel a sense of connaissance since I was a student no sooner than a decade later. How do I know I know how to read?
   
   Reading p. 188: "individuals must have secure cultural belonging if they are to be genuinely free." It occurs to me while reading the book that without such a book about Isaiah Berlin a great deal of what he thought would not be obvious in what he published. He often did not say what he thought. Was this because he was not very secure in his sense of cultural belonging? (Yes).
   
   
   I had not realized how much Sir Isaiah was a philosopher of the sort I would like to be some day. Because of his experiences he was a polyglot. He spent time in the service of his country using his intellectual and social skills. His philosophical views bridged the Western analytic tradition, engaging Wittgenstein in argument for example, but at the same time applying the Continental philosophy of the Hegelian tradition, his excellent introduction to Marx for example. I personally find so much to like. I have found another soul mate.
   
   I also thank those who took the effort to write such good reviews, often including other information to make the experience even more worth while, and leave me with little to do than mention a few quotes as a reminder for myself. This book ought to be read by more people than are apparently reading it.



4. Twentieth Century philosophers in England fall into two groups. The bigger is the one whose members engage in analyzing the meanings of words and the ways that we use them. While this is undoubtedly an important enterprise, it is often rather arid and does not touch on what is really significant to most people. These philosophers tend to teach us cleverness.
   
   The other, rather smaller group, to which Isaiah Berlin belonged (after having started as a member of the first group), addresses itself chiefly to human concerns, to how we ought to live. I maintain that men like him teach us wisdom.
   
   Isaiah Berlin certainly did not live in an ivory tower; and in Michael Ignatieff's immensely attractive biography we can follow his engagement in the great world. Like many other academics, he worked in government during the Second World War: at the Ministry of Information in New York and then at the British Embassy in Washington and (very briefly just after the war) at the Moscow Embassy. As a committed Zionist, he played a minor but not unimportant role, acting as an intermediary between his friend Chaim Weizmann and American politicians during the period when American attitudes towards the aspiration for an independent Israel were being shaped. Weizmann and Ben Gurion both asked him to move to Israel and play a part in shaping the nascent state; but Berlin declined. One reason for this was that he felt himself temperamentally unfitted for the intrigues, infighting and abrasiveness that such a role would involve.
   
   Ignatieff shows repeatedly how, although Berlin had political commitments - particularly to Zionism and to anti-Communism - he shied away from being put into a confrontational position. He did not like making enemies; he liked to please; he was uncomfortably aware of his dual allegiance when working for a British government which was unsympathetic to Zionist aspirations. There seems to me no doubt that the philosophy which would develop in due course was a sublimation of his psychology. It should go without saying that this is not said in denigration of his philosophy: some of the greatest achievements in creativity have been driven by personal needs of this kind. One must judge the value of a philosophy by the quality of the end product, not by its psychological origins.
   
   One of Berlin's essays is entitled The Hedgehog and the Fox. The fox, so an ancient Greek once said, knows many things; the hedgehog knows one big thing. Ignatieff argues that Berlin indeed knew many things but that he had been in search of the one big thing that would make sense not only of the tensions he felt within himself, but also of those which any open-minded person must feel when seeing that in so many important conflicts, whether in personal life, in the history of ideas, in politics, or in philosophical situations, there is so much to be said for each side. He found this one big thing in the notion of Pluralism.
   
   Pluralism means that every individual and every society must accept that there is never one absolute value to which other values must be subordinated. There are many values in life which all command respect; but the most important of these - freedom, justice, equality, tolerance, compassion, loyalty - often must collide. Take, for example, Liberty and Equality. Both are rightly sought after; but equality can only be achieved by curtailing the liberty of action which, if granted, will result in some people pulling ahead of others. And even a single value, like equality, has tension built into it: do we look for equality of opportunity or equality of outcome? Again, if we want equality of opportunity, the result may be inequality of outcome; if we want to ensure equality of outcome, we cannot also have equality of opportunity. There are occasions when unavoidable collisions of values - of allegiance or of moral duty, for example - are the very stuff of tragedy.
   
   Berlin was a liberal and believed in rational discussion; but he thought that no amount of rational discussion can resolve these conflicts of values; and for him it was certainly not a solution to give to any one value absolute priority over others which have as good a claim to be universal.
   
   Berlin was as fascinated by those ideologies which he regarded as inhuman as he was by those he shared. He once said that he would never describe Nazism as mad. It did indeed rest on totally perverted axioms, but upon these axioms its theorists did erect an intellectual structure: how else could one explain that fascism was espoused not just by thugs, but by many academics at universities and by thinkers in other walks of life? Even more so was this the case with Marxism: he detested it, but he truly understood it from within. Ignatieff comments that "Berlin was the only liberal thinker of real consequence to take the trouble to enter the mental worlds of liberalism's sworn enemies." And although liberalism and nationalism, usually allies in the first half of the 19th century, parted company thereafter, Berlin was also one of those rare modern liberals who had respect for nationalism. The freedom to give expression to national identity was an important freedom, but of course it must not itself become oppressive of other people's national identity.
   
   As the book's title suggests, this is a biography that focusses most strongly on the philosopher's life. An exposition of his ideas is skilfully woven into the narrative; but it is not until we are two-thirds of the way through the book, when Berlin had reached the age of 40, that we come upon the chapter headed "Late Awakening" - awakening, that is, to the ideas for which he became famous. But I cannot praise highly enough the loving and vivid portrait of Isaiah Berlin that Ignatieff has given us and the fascinating account of his private and public life.



5. This is the life- story of the most important historian of ideas of the twentieth century. The story is told with clarity and sympathy . And something is caught of the tone and spirit of the person considered to be ' the greatest talker the English language had ' since Coleridge. Berlin was a person not only of remarkable learning, but of tremendous intellectual enthusiasm. His understanding of how it may be impossible to reconcile ' ultimate value claims' is at the heart of his championing of liberal democracy. The story is a remarkable one including not simply his climbing to the top of the pole of the English intellectual establishment ( despite his Jewishness) but his able service in the cause of freedom during the Second World War. One of Berlin's great volumes ( edited by his devoted student Henry Hardy)'Personal Impressions' tells of Berlin's warm friendships with many of the greats of the twentienth century. One such friendship was with Chaim Weizmann first President of Israel. Berlin was a 'Yom Kippur Jew' and ardent Zionist who contributed much to Israel . On a recent walk on Keren Ha- Yesod street in Jerusalem I took special pleasure in seeing a quiet little square named after him. This book should be an introduction to reading his own collections of essays which Hardy put together. They are the remarkable record of a most remarkable mind.

1 comments about Young Sidney Hook: Marxist and Pragmatist.

1. The later career of Sidney Hook is well known. However, his earlier career as a Marxist intellectual and activist has been long ignored by historians and biographers. In this short but brilliant work, Christopher Phelps shows us a completely different Hook and makes an important contribution to the literature on American socialists of the twentieth century. This book is even more crucial because Hook himself disavowed his radical past, making an examination of the complexity of his political trajectory more difficult to follow and study. From the first to the last page, this is a compelling book, providing carefully researched insights into Hook's world including Hook's debates with Max Eastman, Hook's role in the brief but important journal, Marxist Quarterly, and his participation in defending exiled Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky against bogus charges by the brutal Stalin regime. Phelps also discusses important insights about his theoretical views. At a time when utterly disorienting and nihilistic postmodernist theories are fashionable in the social sciences, Phelps' work is like a breath of fresh air that captivates his audience to learn more about history from below, by and about the workers and radical intellectuals that have shaped society. Anyone interested in the history of the 1930s American socialist movement should give this book an immediate place on their bookshelf.

No comments about On Quine (Wadsworth Philosophers Series).

No comments about KARL KONIG: An Autobiography (Karl Konig Archive).

No comments about Kwasi Wiredu and Beyond.

No comments about Memoirs of the Life of Monsieur de Voltaire (Hesperus Classics).

1 comments about Wittgenstein.

1. Probably the best commentary I have read on Wittgenstein. Strong focus on the later Wittgenstein of the Philosophical Investigations. This book is not easy reading. Wittgenstein can be tough going and this book will not chew your food for you. Kenny can at times be almost as difficult as his subject, however this book will reward your efforts and expand your understandings.

1 comments about Georges Bataille: An Intellectual Biography.

1. This translation of Surya's 1992 biography of the notoriously contradictory French writer contains nearly 500 pages of text supported by 86 pages of notes. It is the first full-length biography in either English or French. Bataille is decidedly an acquired taste, so this book may well persuade you to admire this neo-Sadean thinker who spent his sixty-five years (1897-1962) as an archivist at the Bibliothèque Nationale and then as director of the Orléans Municipal Library. Surya weaves together Bataille's scatophilic and necrophilic obsessions and debauched private life with his literary themes in a way that is not sensationalist or prurient. The author does full justice to his subject's provocative claims concerning the role of consumption in capitalist civilization; the negative features of so-called inner experience; the alleged links between eroticism and death; and the supposed impossibility of community. Indirectly, Surya shows how Bataille's persistent preoccupation with the "informe" (formless) not only illuminates some of the most cutting-edge academic work in art history and literary criticism today, but also eerily foreshadows recent scientific theories of catastrophe, chaos and cosmic evolution. Hasty readers have long inferred a fascist moment in writings like "The Psychological Structure of Fascism" (1933), the first psychoanalytical analysis of its subject, according to Surya (177). To counter this widespread tendency, Surya is particularly good at displaying the development of Bataille's "impossible" thought against the background of French left-wing political activity and thus successfully distances Bataille from any easy embrace of French (or German) fascism.
   Surya's book is not easy to read, however, if you're expecting the straightforward prose of Deirdre Bair's biographies of Samuel Beckett, Simone de Beauvoir and Anaïs Nin. Surya's style is that of a sophisticated literary theorist rather than a factual historian. This book is a must if you're already familiar with Bataille's work and wanted to situate it in his life and times. But for a first look, I would turn to Fred Botting and Scott Wilson's introductions to their "The Bataille Reader" (1997) and "Bataille: A Critical Reader" (1997).