Customer Reviews

Ancient Philosophy: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

How should you introduce a country? With an abstract map of its terrain? Or would it be better to show a beautiful picture (or several) to stand for the whole--say the Taj Majal for India--something to lure and enchant the would-be traveler?

Julia Annas chooses the latter strategy. Her introduction leads the reader right to the heart of some of the most important questions of early philosophy: the dichotomy between passion and reason; the nature of the self; whether or not there is a goal to life; what logic is and why it is desirable and necessary; whether knowing is possible; the ways in which we explore the nature and pattern of the universe through science.

Annas' strength is her ability to express the fundamental questions of early philosophy with great clarity and to follow-up with very succinct descriptions of how they were treated by Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and a range of other early philosophers.

Her treatment of The Republic (Penguin Classics) is especially strong. She shows us how from Jowett onwards it came te be regarded primarily as a political work. However, she shows that the work takes up a much broader question, the relation between virtue and happines. Plato sketches the structure of an ideal society as a model for the structure of the soul. Annas provides a good, quick overview of the work itself while demonstrating the ways in which interpretations have varied during different historical periods.

Readers looking for a broader survey might choose Frederick Copleston's History of Philosophy, Volume 1 (History of Philosophy). Those looking for an in-depth view showing how the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers elevated DOING philosophy (rather than studying it as an academic subject) specifically for the purpose of achieving happiness in this life should see Pierre Hadot's very interesting treatment What Is Ancient Philosophy?.

Even the non-beginner will find a very clear and interesting treatment of the major philosophic questions of the ancients in this compact 100-page book.

Every once in a great while comes a book that takes what can be a difficult subject matter and melts it into a coherent, readable whole that can be enjoyed by both student and intelligent reader alike, whether in the classroom or on the commuter train to work.

Unfortunately, this book is not one of them.

To be effective, a "short introduction" must not only be concise, but also reader friendly, keeping to the subject as close as possible in langauge terms designed to enlighten and entertain with an eye toward expanding the reader's interest in the subject covered.

Annas conveys none of the above, mainly because she hardly sticks to the subject matter at hand: philosophy. Instead we get a historical-political-sociological treatise that fails on every level to meet the expectations a reader has coming into the book.

Actually, when one applies common sense, this is too large a subject to fit into too small a format. For a couple of dollars more, there is an excellent title called "Greek Philosophy" by the same publisher. Also, for a few dollars more, are the works of popularizers Bryan Magee, Roger Scruton, and Robert Solomon, each of whom will give you way more than your money's worth. Try them; your wallet won't feel used and abused.

General Review of Book Series: I have to admit it: I am a fan of these little books. It's my dirty little secret. These short introductions provide one with a pocketsize, portable introduction to a wide variety of topics. With a light tone and a surface skim of the issues, these little guides provide one with the general overview one might expect in a small survey course. Naturally, there are downsides. Are these guides comprehensive? Heavens no! Do they take time to dig deeply into the issues? Not generally. But are they a good resource to use if you want to get your feet wet before you dive in? Yes. When used properly, these little guidebooks can allow what might start out as a casual curiosity to develop into a more in-depth research project. In fact, all of these introductions provide references and suggestions for further reading.

Julia Annas's _A Very Short Introduction to Ancient Philosophy_ is a very lively book that immerses the reader into the world of ancient philosophy without assuming any prior knowledge of the topic. Annas throws aside the standard "march through history" account of these thinkers and chooses instead to engage the reader with the problems and concerns these ancient thinkers puzzled over. Many readers have faulted her for this decision for she does not provide a quick & easy reference to names and ideas. But her point is that such a reference guide is, in many ways, impossible to construct. Therefore, we should be aware of how we "create" these thinkers according to our own interests and bias.

Chapter One concerns the battle between reason and emotion in our souls, a discussion that leads right into her treatment of Plato's _Republic_. What is interesting about Annas's account of the _Republic_ is that she chooses to focus upon the ways in which Plato's work has been received by generations of scholars instead of purely focusing on the philosophical merit of the work. While I would have liked a bit more philosophy in this chapter, her analysis helps to reveal the ways in which our understanding of the _Republic_ is influenced (and perhaps even dictated) by our own philosophical interests. Thus, perhaps Annas does not provide a thorough philosophical examination of the _Republic_ because her own interpretation would be hampered by such influence. However, I also suspect that, being a short introduction, there was simply no time to get too heavily involved in it.

Annas's remaining sections are devoted to eudaimonism and virtue, reason and scepticism, and logic and reality. It is the final chapter, however, that I found particularly interesting, perhaps because it deals a bit more with chronology than Annas has chosen to use in the rest of the book. In this chapter, Annas tries to provide some grounds for grouping "ancient philosophy" as a whole, and discusses the ways that thinkers reacted to one another, the dividing influence of Plato, and the status of ancient philosophy after Plato and Aristotle. In general, I enjoy chronological accounts of these thinkers, but Annas does a wonderful job keeping me interested and engaging these thinkers in a slightly different way than I am accustomed to. I would recommend this introduction to anyone thinking of exploring ancient philosophy further.

If you buy this hoping for a quick and easy intro to the names, lives and thoughts of early Greek philosophers, you're going to feel let down. The author seems to think that she's got more important things in mind than organizing and running the essential facts by you. She wants you to wonder about the usual tedious gender/power/class "issues," how perceptions of the Greeks have changed over time, what it all does or doesn't mean to us, and much else I could have lived without. And then she subjects you to pages of "Now, class, what do you think?"-style discussions. Questions for author: how is a reader supposed to have deep or searching thoughts about a field before knowing anything about that field? And: isn't this book meant to be an introduction? By the way, teacher's own deep and searching thoughts didn't impress. All in all, like a day spent at a bad progressive school.

There are probably lots of not-bad intros to the field out there. Maybe other reviewers can suggest a few. I've found intro-to-philosophy books by Bryan Magee and Paul Strathern helpful and well-written. There's always the encylopedia, as well as a couple of free online dictionaries of philosophy.

By the way, beware this whole series of Oxford "Short introductions" unless you have eyes as sharp as an eagle's. Someone gave the designer entirely too much leeway. The books look attractive but are almost unreadable -- the print is dinky (as in footnote-size)and entirely sans serifs. I could manage only five pages at a time before my middle-aged eyes gave out.

I am a beginning student of philosophy, and found Professor Annas' book to be extremely helpful. Not only does she provide a sophisticated introduction to ancient Greek thought, she gives the best definition of philosophy I have yet come across: the search for truth by reasoned argument. These are two major accomplishments for a very small book.

She manages to cover the pre-Socrates, Socrates, Plato, the Sophists, Aristotle, the Stoics, the Skeptics, the Cynics and many others. She covers Plato and Aristotle in surprising depth. Her comments on the others are more brief, but they are to the point and meaningful. She demonstrates very clearly the relevence of ancient Greek thought to the problems we face in our own time.

She uses each chapter to introduce and discuss a major philosophical topic: Ancient theories of personality are exemplified by the various treatments of the Medea legend, she gives an account of the evolution of the interpretations of Plato's Republic, of what constitutes a happy life and how to achieve it, what is knowledge and how do we think of it, and the beginnings of logical reasoning and theories of reality. The Greeks didn't make these distinctions, but there you have most of the branches of modern philosophy: theory of personality, ethics, epistimology, metaphysics, and logic. Prof. Annas' book is much more sophisticated than it at first appears.

I have only one complaint: Like many feminists, she takes the English language convention that the impersonal third-person pronoun is masculine or neuter, ("he, him" or "one") never feminine ("she, her"), personally, and at the oddest momentss plonks down a "she" where a "he" or "one" would normally be expected. This is of course a common device in feminist writing, designed to make a statement about the oppressiveness of Western society in general and the English language in particular. This detracts from her otherwise exemplary prose style. Fortunately, she avoids feminist rhetoric otherwise, even in her discussion of Medea.

The single best thing about this book is that it makes one want to read more.

This book didn't strike me as great, but I feel I have to offer a dissenting opinion at least. It provided an introduction to many names and events in an easy style. Its true that its a huge subject, but it begs for an introduction because you will miss so much if you only read about Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. But I think some of the other criticisms voiced in these reviews may be legitimate.

And VSI is the best series of introductions I've found. They are mostly easy to read, but not aimed so low as to insult the intelligence of most adults. The one exception to this so far has been the VSI to Socrates by C. Taylor.

What is great about this book is that it immeadiately engages you in ancient debates, which is what ancient philosophy is about. Do you really want a list of names and principle doctrines? There are plenty of books like that. There was a different consciousness in ancient times; to read ancient philosophy through our modern consciousness is to misread it. This book helps to engage the reader as the ancients engaged in their philosophy.

This little pamphlet is the first philosophy work that I have ever read, and Prof. Annas wrote it for people like me.

Her intention is to help people engage with the thoughts of the ancient (Greek) philosophers, and to show how the questions with which the ancients grappled are the same questions that we ask today.

I have a somewhat better understanding of Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics. Am I a better person? I do not know. Did the ancient Greeks tell me anything I did not know already? Maybe not.

Yet I think Prof. Annas might say, along with the ancient Greeks, that philosophy is worthwhile even if we derive no benefit from it at all. This is a book about those who practiced philosophy for its own sake.

So I would say that a beginner such as myself ought by all means to engage with both the ancient Greek thinkers and Prof. Annas's exposition of them. You might find yourself wanting to learn more and more about the ancient thinkers, without being sure why.

I found this intro to be quite enjoyable, but it's left me with the impression that the actual ideas of the ancient philosophers are of little merit (excepting the concept of virtue, which Annas is clearly taken by). But surely an intro should encourage a non-specialist reader that a subject has more than academic interest?

Also, the book badly needs editing, not to say proof-reading.

The use of the words 'she' and 'herself' as well as the mockery of the portrayal of Vice as a 'floozy' really sickened me. It made me realize I myself and several other people I know could have written a better book on the subject. Did it feel good to type in 'herself' and 'she' as if to suggest no male will read this book and if they did they were excluded? Can we just get past this feminist finger pointing? This is 2006. There is no doubt the author could have used the pronouns 'his and herself' or something more objective. It just leaves one to ask....why didn't she?