Audiobook: A History of Western Philosophy (Bertrand Russell, 1945)

[madali]

Audiobook: A History of Western Philosophy (Bertrand Russell, 1945)

“Uncertainty, in the presence of vivid hopes and fears, is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live without the support of comforting fairy tales. It is not good either to forget the questions that philosophy asks, or to persuade ourselves that we have found indubitable answers to them.”

Bertrand Russell’s book, “A History of Western Philosophy”, seemed to have been a huge financial success when it was released in the 40s, which in itself sort of amuses me. I can’t even imagine something called “A History of Western Philosophy” being a financial success in my time.

I didn’t read the book, as I listened to it in audiobook format and I have to say that history of western philosophy is not really made for listening to while driving your car. So I have zoned out many times and did not take in all of the book’s information. But that is okay, I suppose, given that it is still better than not taking any information in at all.

The book has more emphasis on the HISTORY part of the title rather than PHILOSOPHY. To introduce the philosophers and the philosophical thoughts, Russell spends a considerate amount of time on providing the historical context. The book is split into three parts, Ancient times, Medieval, and Modern. The Medieval part is almost all history and the least interesting part. But the first and last book strike a good combination of philosophical information backed with historical context.

The best thing about the book is that Russell does not do any idol-worshipping, a trait of almost all philosophical professors of today, that makes it so incredibly hard to ever read anything on philosophy. Russell easily tears down great philosophical legends such as Plato and Socrates and does not shy away from taking them on. For example, on Socrates he mentioned, “He has, however, some very grave defects. He is dishonest and sophistical in argument, and in his private thinking he uses intellect to prove conclusions that are to him agreeable, rather than in a disinterested search for knowledge. There is something smug and unctuous about him, which reminds one of a bad type of cleric. His courage in the face of death would have been more remarkable if he had not believed that he was in to eternal bliss in the company of the gods.”

He just makes it clear to us that even if we disagree with a philosopher, we should first try to see how he came to that conclusion. And that is the best thing I got out of the book. Russell talks about philosophic thoughts that seem instantly wrong, but he makes sure that we can argue why it is wrong. And to argue against it, we have to first fully understand it. It is an intellectual exercise I wish more people would take upon themselves to practice on a regular basis. While we sometimes are so sure we are right at something, we should try to at least see the opposition came to the conclusion they have arrived at. And then better able to formulate our own argument against it.

Oh yeah, Russell is also very witty so it sometimes is almost quiet funny. Next time, I’ll READ it instead of listening to it, because it deserves a second visit, since there are many philosophers and stories I came across that I wish I remembered to read more on. Like Diogenes of Sinope. Go on, wiki him.

4/5

[fizz]

Russell has such as commanding presence of the English language that when reading his book or shorts (which he delivered as lectures) I would have to re-read entire sentences or sometimes paragraphs just to absorb the depth of what he was trying to say. So no, I don't think audiobooks would give anything by him any justice.