1 comments about Within Four Walls: The Correspondence between Hannah Arendt and Heinrich Bl¿cher, 1936-1968.

1. Hannah Arendt has had much of her correspondence published over the last decade or so. We have volumes of her correspodence with Karl Jaspers, Mary McCarthy, Kurt Blumenfeld, and Martin Heidegger, among others. But these letters between Arendt and husband Heinrich Blucher stand out as the finest volume yet published. Whereas in the other volumes we see Arendt as student, friend, confidant, teacher, philosopher, intellectual, in these letters with Blucher we see Arendt as intimate confidant, vulnerable lover, and supportive wife. Heinrich Blucher was the one person to whom she could reveal herself, with whom she dropped her guard. The confidence was mutual as well; in Blucher's letters to Hannah we see his hopes, frustrations, trepidations, and above all, his devoted attachment to her hopes, needs and ambitions. Two people for whom the other was much more than a spouse or lover: someone in whom to take refuge in dark times.

   The letters begin in 1936, shortly after Arendt and Blucher met in Paris, to which both escaped from Berlin in 1933: she after a short prison term for illegal Zionist activity, and he as a member of the German Communist Party, fleeing via Prague. At the time they met she was 29 and he 37. Both were married, but not to each other. They would not marry until 1940, shortly after their divorces became final.

   Their first letters set the tone. Interspersed with intellectual and political affairs are their feelings for each other and their doubts and a lasting commitment can be achieved. IT grows from there, in all aspects, intellectual and emotional. When Arendt reproaches Blucher for not sticking to their letter-writing schedule, she tells him that she cannot continue to careen like a car wheel that has come off, "without a single connection to home or anything I can rely on."

   They also discuss mutual friends such as Karl Jaspers, Mary McCarthy, Alfred Kazin, and Martin Heidegger (whose relationship over the years with Arendt can only be described as ambivilent), holding nothing back and giving the reader a rare glimpse into their intellectual and social world, a glimpse one can only imagine in a formal biography of the two. As no one writes letters anymore, this is a most valuable look into an intellectual time and world as distant from our cyber-present as last century's history.

   Worth your time and money? Yes - in every sense of the word.

2 comments about Richard Rorty (Philosophy Now).

1. "His [Rorty's] controversial work has generally been more influential than understood - a fate that justifies an `introduction'" (pg. 2). People like Malachowski are rare to find in philosophy departments. Rorty has more critics than supporters. Malachowski's "Richard Rorty" is a sympathetic and chronological approach to Rorty's intellectual development. Malachowski's more important contribution is the book he edited, Reading Rorty: Critical Responses to Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature and Beyond.
   
   Rorty, himself, can be very accessible and fun to read. The best example is his collection of popular essays in the book Philosophy and Social Hope. If you've never read Rorty before and are looking for one entrance point: buy that book written by Rorty and not this one by Malachowski.
   
   Malachowski creates sections within chapters with headings like "Heidegger" and "Wittgenstein." These sections represent brackets where some of Rorty's influences and themes are placed. Some of these sections are too small to be a contribution to the literature on Rorty but they are sufficiently long and substantive for an introduction to Rorty. For example, the section on "Wittgenstein" would be considered outdated or insufficient considering Rorty's recent publication of his 4th volume of Philosophical Papers where Rorty makes another distinction in his reading on Wittgenstein in the essay "Wittgenstein and the Linguistic Turn."
   
   Malachowski justifies his writing an introduction to Rorty by including a chapter on how he thinks Rorty has been misunderstood and abused by critics (the chapter is titled "Some critics"). In that chapter, Malachowski defends Rorty against Simon Blackburn, Alasdiar MacInytre, Thomas Nagel, John Searle, and Bernard Williams.
   
   For recommendations of other books on/about Rorty see my near-comprehensive Amazon listmania titled "Richard Rorty"



2. Richard Rorty by Alan Malachowski is an instalment in the Philosophy Now series published by Princeton University Press. This recent series is focused on introducing contemporary philosophers.
   
   My experience has been that reader reaction to these types of introductions is in large part influenced by two factors, one's view of the "philosopher" under consideration and the quality of the author's presentation of the "philosopher"
   
   With regard to Rorty, although I disagree with him on many points, he is an important commentator with interesting and provocative views. He is particularly effective in highlighting the assumptions and limitations of analytic philosophy - the assessment of his ideas varies amongst readers. Malachowski's exposition of Rorty, and his ideas, is on the weak side. Clearly Malachowski is well versed in Rorty's work, however, his writing style can be irritating. Though Malachowski is lucid at times, in general he comes off like the overly chatty waiter - intruding on a pleasant experience. He appears to be trying too hard to emulate Rorty's conversational writing style. Additionally, for an introduction the book is a bit too ambitious in attempting to put forward Rorty's views as well as those of his critics (difficult in under 200 pages).
   
   This is not a terrible book, however, it misses the mark as an entry point to Rorty.

No comments about Wittgenstein: Biography and Philosophy.

1 comments about Hobbes: A Biography.

1. One, if not the first, in a series of biographies of European philosophers by Cambridge University Press, this volume more than holds its own and is bound to becomne the standard text on the life of Thomas Hobbes.

   Deftly written and extremely well researched, this is a volume not only for the scholar of English philosophy or history, but for the well-read layman as well. Martinich presents his subject chronologically, as any good biography should, with brief stopovers for analysis of each Hobbes text both philosophically and within the historical context against which it was written. Martinich is most unusual in that he does not take his own words as the last ones on the subject; there are pages on his disagreements with other writers on interpretations of both the life and thought of Hobbes, which makes this volume both unusual and valuable to any understanding of its subject.

   Pricey, but strongly recommended, especially if one has any of the other volumes in the Cambridge series. If possible, wait for the paperback . . . but not too long, for there is much about Hobbes one will miss.

No comments about Correspondence of Spinoza.

3 comments about The Thought and Character of William James (Vanderbilt Library of American Philosophy).

1. Perry's text is the original, definitive expression of William James' philosophy, outside of the writings of James -- a founder father of the philosophical genre of pragmatism, contemporary American social thought and modern psychology -- himself. Despite the multitude of books written on and about James and his ideas since, no serious student of William James should be without or ignore this one. It is the Genesis-text, as it were, of Jamesean studies.

   Perry organizes and effectively analyzes the whole array of James' diverse writings (including reprints of some tremendous and now otherwise difficult to find selections), enabling any reader to obtain a comprehensive and detailed understanding of James' philosophy. At the same time, Perry infects his analysis with a solid and enduring illustration of James's personality, without ever becoming either trite or merely philosophical biography.

   Perry's own skills as a writer are evident in such passages as the following, which is a most memorable description of the breadth and depth of Jame's character: "[James] called himself empiricist, pluralist, pragmatist, individualist, but whenever he did so he began at once to hanker after the fleshpots of rationalism, monism, intellectualism, socialist. He liked body in his philosophizing, and he hated to leave out anything that had either flavor or nutritive value. He was much more afraid of thinness than he was of inconsistency."

   In one or two places, the serious James scholar might have a difference of opinion with Perry's analysis, whether historical or philosophical, but all philosophy texts are susceptible to such criticism, and Perry's is less susceptible than most. Indeed, it will be by treating Perry's text as a sound starting place that the inexperienced or unfamiliar reader might become such an adept analyst and capable of interpreting James' life, character and thought so well.




2. Perry's text is the original, definitive expression of William James' philosophy, outside of the writings of James -- a founder father of the philosophical genre of pragmatism, contemporary American social thought and modern psychology -- himself. Despite the multitude of books written on and about James and his ideas since, no serious student of William James should be without or ignore this one. It is the Genesis-text, as it were, of Jamesean studies.

   Perry organizes and effectively analyzes the whole array of James' diverse writings (including reprints of some tremendous and now otherwise difficult to find selections), enabling any reader to obtain a comprehensive and detailed understanding of James' philosophy. At the same time, Perry infects his analysis with a solid and enduring illustration of James's personality, without ever becoming either trite or merely philosophical biography.

   Perry's own skills as a writer are evident in such passages as the following, which is a most memorable description of the breadth and depth of Jame's character: "[James] called himself empiricist, pluralist, pragmatist, individualist, but whenever he did so he began at once to hanker after the fleshpots of rationalism, monism, intellectualism, socialist. He liked body in his philosophizing, and he hated to leave out anything that had either flavor or nutritive value. He was much more afraid of thinness than he was of inconsistency."

   In one or two places, the serious James scholar might have a difference of opinion with Perry's analysis, whether historical or philosophical, but all philosophy texts are susceptible to such criticism, and Perry's is less susceptible than most. Indeed, it will be by treating Perry's text as a sound starting place that the inexperienced or unfamiliar reader might become such an adept analyst and capable of interpreting James' life, character and thought so well.




3. William James was as incongruent as his philosophy; and I don't mean this sardonically. He was a lover both of art and science; both of the unity of the whole and the plurality of parts; both of the rationalistic and the sentimental parts of life. It is always suprising to me not that he could be all these things, but how well he balanced them all. Whenever one trait would come to the forefront, James almost instinctively checked it with an equal and opposite impulse.

   This book gives us a front-row seat to watch James's balancing act up close! By my estimates, a little over half of this book's text is letters either from or to James (by frinecs such as Perice, Holmes, Dewey, Bergson, and his brother Henry). The author does a good job weaving these letters together with biographical infromation; with this mixture, he does two things. He puts James's life in the context of his philosophy (philosophies?) and puts his philosophy(-ies)in the context of his life. The best part, to me, was the author's ability to discouse on each book James wrote integrating its philosophy with the events of James's world at the time.

   As with most biographies, this one does have a tendency (too much so in my opiinion) to psychologize in ways that, to me, seem stretching. The last two chapters, for instance, on James's "Morbid Traits" and his "Benign Traits" are like a psychological summary of James, often identifying traits James posessed as ones that are hinted at in his works (particularly the Varieties of Religous Experience). While sections like these can be interesting, they can also (as these two are) become overkill. I read the rest of the book (which psychologizes but keeps it to a minimum) and skimmed these two chapters.

   Otherwise, this s a great biography. Not so intellectual as to be inaccessable to general readers, but not to watered down that we don't both learn new things about James and the philosophic landscape on every page. To put it strangely, to me, James is like a great jazz ballad - the more you come into contact with its intricacies, the more you grow to cherish it. And, I suppose that James is like jazz - emphasizing the individuality of the parts rather than a pre-determined whole. And like a good jazz tune, James's philosophy was never finished - always open ended.

   So go read the book already.

2 comments about Lady of the Lotus-Born.

1. it seems the tradition of retelling life-stories in tibet was largely for teaching purposes. this book does that part well. a valuable support for the depressed yogini.



2. Yeshe Tsogyal, or White Tara, was a rare example of a female buddha. She has walked the earth many times but her 200+ years here with Padmasambhava left a legacy for all mankind that we are still learning from. She left behind many treasures and teachings for us to use as we grow. Some treasures are still to be found.

   To understand Yeshe Tsogyal is to understand the true meaning of compassion and detached giving. These are lessons for all time.

4 comments about Being and Some Philosophers.

1. Gilson's treatise is a wonderful survey of the history of metaphysics, in its endless struggle with the question of being. Every bit as ferocious a critique of the metaphysical tradition as anything Heidegger wrote, and arguably superior in terms of insight and coherence, BEING AND SOME PHILOSOPHERS ultimately resolves philosophy's perennial "forgetfulness regarding existence" by a turn to Thomas Aquinas and the Thomist concept of God as the actus essendi subsistens. Anyone who thinks, after reading this book, that Thomas is not as innocent of metaphysical naivete as Heidegger is often said to be has simply failed to grasp the meaning of Gilson's argument. Really a brilliant book.



2. Gilson is an excellent communicator and this book is evidence of such a claim. From the Pre-Socratics to the Modern Period, Gilson peels back the cover of historical philosophy and examines the metaphysical issues of being, existence, essence, the one, substance, etc. What is more, Gilson ventures into the epistemic foundations of knowledge and existence - the two cannot be separated, but in usual Thomistic fashion, being always precedes knowing (unlike the Cartesian claim - which Gilson determines is one of the most serious problems of modern philosophy: see "The Unity of Philosophical Experience").

   Gilson, in a type of systematic fashion, takes his reader on a journey throughout the history of philosophy and discusses certain philosopher's notions about specific metaphysical issues. However, but agreeably so, Gilson compares and contrasts the various philosophers to the metaphysical system which, according to this text, seems to be the most tenable, namely Thomistic metaphysics.

   Gilson does such a good job pointing out the problematic areas of other philosophers (regarding these metaphysical issues) that it is difficult to disagree with him. The title of the book fits perfectly with its contents, namely being is discussed in light of some philosophers and their assertions regarding being, etc. If you are wanting a text which discusses certain philosophers throughout history, with respect to the issues of being, existence, substance, essence, etc. and wanting to gain a greater grasp of Thomistic metaphysics, then you could not read a better text. I highly recommend this book.




3. This is perhaps the greatest and most illuminating study of the history of metaphysics and the problems that motivate it that I've ever read. Gilson begins by discussing metaphysics as the inquiry of being qua being and shows why philosophy is led endlessly back to this issue because of a fundamental ambiguity belonging to the concept of being. On the one hand we use being as a noun denoting possibility or the whatness of a thing. For instance, a triangle is a three sided figure regardless of whether triangles actually exist or not. On the other hand we use being in the sense of the verb "to be" denoting existence or the fact that something is. Problems emerge when we recognize that when we speak of beings we tend to emphasize their intelligibility, essence or whatness, while nonetheless all of us are actually concerned with whether or not a particular essence actually is. Since there's not much that can actually be said about existence, philosophy progressively comes to emphasize the intelligibility of beings as in the case of Wolffe, Kant and Hegel such that being becomes reduced to a field of pure possibility (formal ontology) that cannot explain what existence adds, if anything, to the being of a thing. Gilson traces this tension throughout the history of philosophy, examining Parmenides, Plato, Plotinus, the Scholastics, modern thought and existentialism showing how all of these different thought experiments have been attempts to come to terms with this issue. Ultimately Gilson wants to advocate a Thomistic solution to this problem, but whether you agree with Gilson's solution or not, what's truly of value in this book is the paradoxes and difficulties inherent in the different attempts to reconcile being as possibility or essence and being as existence. This really is a must read for anyone interested in metaphysics and in contemporary critiques of essentialism and universals. As someone deeply entrenched in contemporary continental philosophy (Deleuze/Heidegger), what is so amazing about this book is that it is so relevant to current debates and argued in such a reasonable and careful way. Where many critiques of essentialism today take on the cast of being teleological and moralistic by virtue of referring to some sort of politics as the reason that we should reject essentialism, Gilson shows that the troubles with essentialism are internal metaphysical problems in their own right that deserve to be addressed in their own terms. Gilson ultimately does not reject essences, but does argue that we cannot divorce essence from existence.



4. A great friend of mine, who has taught the full spectrum of philosophy courses, gave me this book as a preparation for Fritz Wilhelmsen's book, "The Paradoxical Structure of Existence," which I had read some time ago but not understood well. Gilson is the pinnacle of lucidity and insight. He presents philosophical positions with which he may end up differing in such a way as to give them all the credit they do deserve. Like Aristotle carefully thinking and correcting, he arrives at compelling conclusions in a very undogmatic and patient manner. It is hard not to be jealous of Gilson in a way: Few people can combine such subtlety of understanding, keenness of insight, and lucidity. This is one of the rarest philosophical books to be found, in which there is really no "Gefuffel," to use Wilmoore Kendall's word. He is one of those people you read and think, "I wish I had a mind like that." This book has had a profound impact on me, because it is anything but "armchair philosophy" -- once you get what he's driving at, it makes all the difference.

1 comments about The Point of View : Kierkegaard's Writings, Vol 22.

1. The greatest challenge for any newcomer to Kierkegaard is finding the best place to gain an overview. In my opinion, this is the finest place to start. In the main work in this collection, THE POINT OF VIEW (the book also contains some smaller pieces on his Authorship), Kierkegaard sets out to explain his purposes and strategy in writing the books constituting what he calls his Authorship. Students of Kierkegaard generally refer to these books as his Pseudonymous Authorship, because in all of these he writes none of them under his own name, but employs a variety of fictionalized authors, who represent a particular point of view that is not that of Kierkegaard himself. The Pseudonymous works are contrasted with what has become to be known as Kierkegaard's Second Literature (a descriptions attributed to Kierkegaard scholar Robert L. Perkins), which comprises his edifying works and his later religious works, most of which were published under Kierkegaard's own name, though with a couple of his greatest later works published under the pseudonym Anti-Climacus.

   Some of these works, such as EITHER/OR I, contain writings on a variety of aesthetic topics. Many of the books deal with either ethical or religious topics, though the latter never from within a religious perspective. Kierkegaard's main argument in the POINT OF VIEW is that from first to last he was, even when writing on aesthetic topics, a religious author. The Pseudonymous works all presuppose a theory of stages, which Kierkegaard describes as moving from the aesthetic to the ethical and into the religious (the precise prepositions, according to SK, being of the utmost importance).

   It is not clear that Kierkegaard had a precise understanding of all this at the moment he was writing the first of his Pseudonymous works, but it is unquestionable that he moved to this point of view fairly early on. This little volume is, therefore, a wonderful introduction to Kierkegaard's most famous works, and remains one of the most fascinating reflections by a great writer on the nature of his own work ever written.

2 comments about Encounters with Destiny: Autobiographical Reflections.

1. The writer Javid Iqbal is the son of Allama Iqbal, the great poet/Philosophy of the Indian Subcontinent.
   Justice Javid Iqbal has chronicled an insightful biography wich is divided into 6 major themes.
   
   1. Childhood
   2. His Education (Doctoral Degree in Philosophy at Cambridge and Bar at Law)
   3. Life as a Lawyer/Diplomat
   4. Political Career in 1971.
   5. Judicial Career as Justice spanning from 1971-1989.
   
   Justice Javid born in 1924 is older than the state of Pakistan. While recounting his years, he has brilliantly managed to synthesize why the Pakistan nation has failed to understand the true ideals of Jinnah and Iqbal.
   
   This autobiography also contains lessons for the Pakistani nation to understand the shortcoming of our political & Judicial system and to rectify these deficiences and hypocrisy of the Pakistani leaders (Bhutto and Zia) to project islam as means to consolidate their reigns.



2. One of the few books I've read where the translation adds to the book. The style is fabulously readable and interesting - English spiced with the idiom of the subcontinent. Dr Iqbal comes across as, not just talented and purposeful, but a tremendously nice guy and it's great to see that a nice guy can succeed in so many areas by being a decent human being in the face of so much self-promoting corruption. He seems to embody the idea of the open hand, open heart, open mind. We need more statesmen of such caliber.
   
   This book was so interesting I couldn't put it down. It describes a life fully lived, fun, engaged and delighting in people, creating and joining in culture, promoting understanding and harmony.