This lexicon of modern Western philosophical concepts, problems, principles, and theories may well be the shortest dictionary of philosophy in the English language, but one of the most useful. Organized by internationally recognized philosopher of science Mario Bunge, this indispensable volume, directed to general and university audiences, elucidates and evaluates many contemporary philosophical ideas in a naturalistic, rationalist, empiricist, and scientific manner. From A to Z, most entries are brief and nontechnical in nature, highlighting useful philosophical terms rather than trendy ones. Placing emphasis on "living" philosophy, Bunge has consciously excluded many of the archaic terms and philosophical curios of other dictionaries. He has incorporated a number of "minipapers, " or longer definitions of some terms, as well as making use of special characters and symbols when necessary.
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
From Library Journal
Adopting "a naturalist and scientistic standpoint" rather than staying "neutral," Bunge (Finding Philosophy in Social Science, Yale Univ., 1996) claims to define only philosophical terms of "enduring value," to shun "trendy" terms, and to avoid "solemnity" so as to "lighten, not burden" his listener. All that not only significantly limits the range of this dictionary but lends it an air of dogmatism. Although Bunge offers some correct and useful definitions (especially of terms in logic), his writing is so far from clear and the work so marred by numerous sloppy and incorrect definitions (e.g., defining "ambiguity" as denoting more than one object when the issue is whether one can tell which use is meant from the context, contradictions in defining "a priori/a posteriori" and "hypothesis") that, on the whole, this dictionary fails to come close to the many fine works already available. Avoid it! Instead, rely on Robert Audi's The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (LJ 7/95), Simon Blackburn's The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (LJ 11/1/94), and Ted Honderich's The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (LJ 7/95).?Robert Hoffman, York Coll., CUNY
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc.
From Booklist
Bunge is a prolific philosopher, lately concentrating on the social sciences and their relationship to philosophy. Many academic libraries hold all or part of his eight-volume Treatise on Basic Philosophy (Reidel/Kluwer, 1974^-89). In this new dictionary of "modern philosophical concepts, problems, principles, and theories," Bunge has attempted to create a fresh entry in a crowded field. This work concentrates on Western terms and ideas, omitting concepts the author considers to be obsolete or rooted in philosophic fashion or trends. In many ways, this is a dictionary of the philosophy of science, as Bunge uses scientific examples, especially from the physical sciences, to elucidate many concepts and focuses on concepts of interest to philosophers of science.
Entries are arranged alphabetically and range in length from a few sentences to a few paragraphs. Ample cross-references are provided. The definitions are fairly clear, and the examples used to illustrate concepts are appropriate although somewhat technical. Some of the entries include declarative or judgmental conclusions without sufficient explanation (e.g., existentialism is described as "a hodge-podge of enigmatic utterances").
Bunge's approach is not historical. Therefore, this work cannot stand on its own for beginning students of philosophy who need to understand the historical context and evolution of philosophic thought. Entries on terms such as form, falsifiability, and rationalism make no mention of the philosophers or times of their emergence as key concepts. In fact, the uninitiated reader could easily get the sense that philosophy is not something done by people, because there is almost no reference to philosophers at all. Furthermore, there are no entries on individual philosophers or schools of philosophic thought.
The tone of the entries is decidedly unique. On the one hand, many entries read more like a logic or mathematics text than a generally philosophical one. On the other hand, many entries have a more casual, almost humorous tone (there is an entry for hair-splitting, described as "a favorite with theologians and with philosophers without long-term research projects"). The result can be a little unsettling, as the text suddenly shifts from readable to technical with little warning. This is compounded by a tendency to unnecessarily wander into logical notation when plain language would do and a system of cross-references that uses upward-pointing arrows.
Given the complete lack of historical context, the focus on a somewhat narrow spectrum of philosophical concepts, and the opinionated nature of many of the conclusions, this is not a first choice for a one-volume dictionary of philosophy. Better choices would be The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (Cambridge, 1995) or A Dictionary of Philosophy (Blackwell, 1996). Comprehensive academic philosophy collections may want to consider this purchase. Bunge's approach will probably be best appreciated by logicians and philosophers of science.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A uniquely valuable philosophical work,
By A Customer
This review is from: Dictionary of Philosophy (Hardcover)
There are many philosophical dictionaries on the market, but only one with the wit, scientific insight, and philosophical acuity of Mario Bunge's. Unburdened by peripheral terms from theology or forgotten philosophies, and uncluttered by entries on individual authors, Bunge seems to hold the exotic views that philosophy, a) like science, should be a living discipline which sloughs off its dead matter, leaving it behind for antiquarians to fuss over; and b) should be about reality and ideas, especially ideas about reality, not about trying to decipher, much less deconstruct, what some oddly famous person with a defective prose style might have meant to say about them. One might regret this dictionary's lack of almost any historical or etymological explanations, were it not for the fact that such information is the strength of many other easily available reference works. The net result is that this is a compact, engaging work which doubles as a modern philosophical treatise in microminiature. You will not, for example, find in it terms such as "eschatological", but you will find crystal-clear and interesting entries on "test", "technology, philosophy of", "praxiology", "tychism", "inverse problem", "mereology", "universal grammar", and "background of a research field". Some particularly valuable entries of medium or longer length include those on "mind-body problem", "mathematics, philosophy of", "linguistics", "atomism", and a series of entries beginning with "system". Others of a different sort include "charlacanism", "dadaism, philosophical", and "H". Some of the more acidly humorous remarks are buried though: the hilput, the unit measure of philosophical fickleness, is only mentioned in the entry for the latter, and not actually defined on its own. This is absolutely not the one-stop philosophical dictionary to buy 24 hours before a final exam in philosophy 101- at least if you want to pass the course, and forget all about it ever after. Nor is it a specialized dictionary most likely to appeal to mathematicians or logicians, although there are several very useful entries on e.g. various logical topics of philosophical interest. It is though a great read and a great reference, stylistically more like Bierce or Johnson or Fowler than Webster. Beginners should be aware though, that while mostly very readable, there are some technical entries. While this really is a philosophical dictionary, it is a very unique one, and should be considered, and appreciated, as a philosophical work on its own.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
useful, very inforamtive, and great fun.,
By A Customer
This review is from: Dictionary of Philosophy (Hardcover)
Mario Bunge s Dictionary is terrific. It is a comprehensive, informative dictionary and it offers an idiosyncratic outlook. Bunge is a rationalist of the old school: a polymath, a systematizer, and a scientific philosopher; and he is reasonable, humorous, and competent. He is a phenomenon. Examples: Mereology is useful for those who happen to have bumped into the word and for experts: he introduces it and its place in ontology in 10 lines plus 3 cross-references. Bunge explains Free Logic and why is redundant and erroneous. This invites careful exposition; the curious may seek it in the first volumes of Bunge s Treatise . Situational Logic is less happy: Bunge says, no such thing . This is wonderfully Laconic and amusing, but insufficient; it could be, were some cross reference inserted, say, to the excellent item Praxiology . Even Sawdust Philosophy , not a term that readers will look up, is enlightening and has nice cross-references. Bunge s discussion of Quotes combines sense and humor with usefulness. So are Eclecticism , Exactification , God , Science , and Schrödinger s Cat and so on. An author of over 50 serious books in diverse fields, Bunge understandably boasts tremendously broad knowledge. Famous as a student of logic and mathematics, of ontology and epistemology, and of the natural science, he should be better known for his knowledge of and insights into the social sciences; the Dictionary should help. Bunge s familiarity with new intellectual trends and his jeers at trendy humbug are as terrific as ever. He is as appreciative of achievements as dismissive of the rest: Tell me how many psuedosciences you buy, and I ll tell you what your philosophy of science is worth ( pseudoscience ). He buys only one: the idea that all psychoses are physical. Still, his emergentism renders his biologism a middle ground between the more popular views and as such he should count as ally of all who are not duped by extremism: Consistency is vital, but it is useless when reached at the excessive use of Dot Dot Dot . Great fun and great value.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent; needed.,
By A Customer
This review is from: Dictionary of Philosophy (Hardcover)
This book fills a much needed gap in the philosophical literature. It is a small dictionary of philosophical terms focusing on those relevant to the philosophy of science. It contains some humourous entries which actually make reading it rather than using it merely as a reference possible. (HINT: Look up "H", or "Dasein")
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
