How nice to read something that draws out your thoughts, and then helps you analyze them instead of brashly telling you what they ought to be. This isHow nice to read something that draws out your thoughts, and then helps you analyze them instead of brashly telling you what they ought to be. This is a great book for those yet to reach a firm decision about whether Christianity is for them....more
One hundred philosophers covered in two hundred pages. A succinct synopsis of the various contributions and ideas put forward, starting from Thales ofOne hundred philosophers covered in two hundred pages. A succinct synopsis of the various contributions and ideas put forward, starting from Thales of Miletus and ending with Quine. I read it at a rate of one philosopher per day, giving me just a little time in between for intellectual digestion....more
"Historical interpretations differ even when the experts agree on the facts." This sentence sums up the essence of the book. Worldviews, political lea"Historical interpretations differ even when the experts agree on the facts." This sentence sums up the essence of the book. Worldviews, political leanings, biases, agendas and more all affect the retelling of past events. It's a buyer-beware world out there. Yet, it's better to be informed than uninformed, so readers must press on. One solution is to know the mindset of the historian your reading, another is to read multiple historians and hopefully get a well-rounded perspective. ...more
You just never know. This book started out slow, picked up in the middle, and ended as a slow read. I really liked one idea. The pragmatic method inteYou just never know. This book started out slow, picked up in the middle, and ended as a slow read. I really liked one idea. The pragmatic method interprets competing ideas by evaluating their respective consequences. What difference would it make if one idea was true and the other false, or vice versa? If no practical difference can be found in the alternatives, then all dispute is idle. This is an inverse way to justify disputing ideas that do matter....more
At just over 120 pages, this is a fast-reading, well-written, presentation on the various views pertaining to metaphysics, and the Christian perspectiAt just over 120 pages, this is a fast-reading, well-written, presentation on the various views pertaining to metaphysics, and the Christian perspective. I especially like the primary and secondary perceptual properties stemming from Locke and an earlier argument against determinism on the basis that it excludes true rationality. The conclusion? Like cultivating one's doctrinal views, it all demands understanding, surmising, and a fair bit of interpretation to arrive a substantive position. ...more
This is a book I started and stopped. Wanting to get it finished, I picked it up again only to realize I stopped just before the good part. I thought This is a book I started and stopped. Wanting to get it finished, I picked it up again only to realize I stopped just before the good part. I thought this intro to philosophy did a good job of defining the issues, of which, for me, the main issue is whether a book promotes or denies the existence of God. I must say I found myself refuting many of the general arguments for determinism and the nonexistence of God, but I also think it's good to hear out all sides of a matter. Well written, well organized, engaging - I recommend this book....more
It's saying something to us when there are over 60,000 copies in print, and I concur. This book ought to be mandatory reading for every college studenIt's saying something to us when there are over 60,000 copies in print, and I concur. This book ought to be mandatory reading for every college student in America. So it is that the word ought reflects a transcendent ideal, which makes it harmonious with natural law and Christianity. Students ought to read this book, and we ought to love and embrace virtue. But, will we? What we do is another matter, yet our actions don't negate the ought and our conscience informs us of our failings. Holmes lucid writing makes the role of ethics in Christianity crystal clear. The Bible does not comment on every conceivable dilemma, leaving the duty to apply moral reasoning to us. To be very transparent, another reason I liked Holme's book so much was that I couldn't help but notice how my book, Knowledge unto Relationship, resonates with his arguments. We are relational beings more so than irrational, yet there is a path in keeping with Aristotle that starts with reason, finds virtue, and manifests in love. Love, exalting the very essence of moral virtue, functions in relationships....more
I'm glad to be finished! Yeah! The reason, however, I must confess, is that I didn't find Smith's work all that engaging. He discusses virtues in the I'm glad to be finished! Yeah! The reason, however, I must confess, is that I didn't find Smith's work all that engaging. He discusses virtues in the greater context of social order, nobly promoting self-command, admiring the Stoics, and prudence. I liked a few things very much, for example, when he speaks of the Stoic's outlook on danger (pg 329). I also liked what he said (pg 209) when thinking of Hume, "an ingenious and agreeable philosopher, who joins the greater depth of thought to the greatest elegance of expression, and possesses the singular and happy talent of treating the abstruesest subjects not only with the most perfect perspicuity, but with the most lively eloquence."
We need to read both current and older works because that's where we'll find depth and elegance, perspicuity and eloquence. They are worth reading for, even if the gems among the rough are a little harder to find at times, yet nonetheless, they sparkle. ...more
Although I wouldn't go so far as to subscribe to his accusations regarding motives, I do think Lewontin does a fantastic job of characterizing the natAlthough I wouldn't go so far as to subscribe to his accusations regarding motives, I do think Lewontin does a fantastic job of characterizing the naturalistic worldview occupying academic institutions. He does a great job of debunking Dawkin's gene ideology and related nonsense that suggests morality is encoded within our genes. He shows the weakness of reductionism and determinism and provides insight by balancing arguments for nature versus nurture, additionally offering useful distinctions between agent and cause. It's an older book, so I certainly suspect some of his admonitions against the Human Genome project haven't borne out. Still, his readiness and ableness to raise questions merit reading. Is science above criticism? Or, is this not the type of criticism that makes for a healthy establishment?...more
Loading...
