Customer Reviews

Philosophy: 100 Essential Thinkers

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

 

 

Philip Stokes traces -- quickly, succinctly, and always in a page-and-a-half -- exactly why each philosopher included in "100 Essential Thinkers" has earned a place in the book's pages. While the text is perfect for a quick brush-up on famous names throughout history you know you should know but you can't ever remember exactly why (or exactly what they did or said), it is just that -- a primer, a relatively painless refresher, but far from a comprehensive account of each individual. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed the book, mostly because of the tone and layout of the entries on each thinker -- Stokes has a gift for summing up the thrust of complicated philosophical preponderances in lightning-quick, lucid and polemic-free prose. He also begins each little article with an interesting blurb or quotation from the thinker, and provides a picture, painting, etching or sculpture. All this makes it easier to anchor the person, usually described only in terms of their abstract ideas, more firmly in your mind. (Democritus looks wasted, for example, and Whitehead lives up to his name...and wait until you see the push-broom moustache on Neitzsche...)

The book details little of its thinkers' lives, except where perhaps relevant to the evolution of ideas and theories important to philosophy, but does occasionally trace an idea or a solution through its earlier manifestations. All in all, it's a snack of a book...and for some of the 100 greatest thinkers (like St. Anselm, Schelling, Philo of Alexandria) that's probably as in-depth as you'll ever want to go.

Stokes presents a brief introduction to his chosen panoply of 100 influential Western thinkers, from Ancient Greece to the present. A concise (about one page per philosopher) and informative read, well suited as an introduction to the ideas and schools of thought of these major figures. At times Stokes seems to slip his own assumptions and preference into the fabric of his assessments (for instance he seems to personally defend Sartre's existentialist conclusions). Of course, this is not in and of itself bad and Stokes does not make any claim to try for some sort of perfect objectivity. Whether or not Stokes' own views and affinities color his presentation should be no problem to the reader who plans on learning from more than one source (which is always a good idea). While reading this book it has been interesting to see how each philosopher begins his own progression of thought with certain assumptions. Subsequent thinkers who agree with certain aspects of another's philosophy, but disagree with the conclusions of that philosopher, merely need to alter certain foundational assumptions---sometimes it seems in order to support an already reached conclusion. What underlies the assumptions that cause philosophers to choose or reject certain ideas? Stokes' presentation makes this question stand out, for you merely have to turn the page and there is another great philosopher finding an earlier thinkers ideas "acceptable" or "unacceptable" as a statement of fact without much explanation as to why. It is in this way an introductory book such as this may well spur a likely candidate on to further study in philosophy. Overall: A good introduction as well as a good source for a quick brain refresh on famous philosophers' ideas and works.

I use this book in my an introductory survey to philosophy class at the high school level. My students and I have found it to be accessible but accurate and informative.

100 Essential Thinkers is precisely that; a broad list of thinkers who have affected the Western tradition rather than simply philosophers. Stokes' list is well organized and expansive; he covers everyone from the pre-Socratics (Thales, Parmenides, Heraclitus) up to the postmodernists (Foucault, Derrida), to the analytic philosophers (Ayer, Popper, Carnap), and everyone in between (Hume, Descartes, Kant). Scientists are given their due in this list, too (Newton, Copernicus, Einstein). He helpfully lists thinkers in an order so as to better understand each in a broader context, with groupings such as "The New Scientists," "The Linguistic Turn," "The Rationalists," or "The Empiricists." Many if not all of the thinkers are cross refferenced to one another, allowing the reader to use this as a helpful reference and refresher.

Stokes' writing is much in keeping with Wittgenstein's adage that "Anything that can be said can be said simply." Each entry provides a clear and useful explanation of a thinker's contribution to Western philosophy, science, and/or thought. The author manages to explain very complex ideas very eloquently and simply without betraying any important details or nuance. Stokes demonstrates in his writing an authoritative understanding of the specific material he is presenting and of the history of philosophy. He includes the most current and in many cases still living thinkers (i.e., Chomsky).

While Stokes' book won't be cited in academia anytime soon, it serves as the best introduction I have found available for such a variety of thinkers. I would definitely recommend to anyone looking for a good introduction to philosophy.

First, I recognize the near impossibility of such a project, for one writer to give an objective sketch of such a range of thinkers, so as to tell more about them than about himself and his own issues. If you are sympathetic to Mr. Stokes' agenda, the book will seem like a pedagogic marvel. If you have other viewpoints (such as valuing anything before the Enlightenment for its own sake, and not as baby steps toward REAL philosophy), you will likely be disappointed.

I have no pretensions to a grandeur of vision adequate to this enormous task; but I really lost my breath at how grossly some thinkers were reduced to droll footnotes--for example, Augustine (a significant portion devoted to Wittgenstein's critique of Augustine--huh??--and the Pelagian controversy: no axes here, I can see--NOT) and John Duns Scotus (the history of 'dunce', WITHOUT mentioning Erasmus: thanks for the objective introduction, that really presents Scotus' thought in a penetrating way. Unbelievable).

I have no alternative to recommend; but I will set as a requirement for a introductory text: it should have multiple writers, so that the reader can learn from an informed and passionate source, what each said and why it matters.

Fortunately, the section on modern and contemporary thinkers does improve--but they're the ones that really matter, right?

When Lenin and Keynes share equal space with Plato and Kant, we have left the forum of philosophy, in my opinion.

Caveat emptor.

I have many philosophy books of this kind and this one is among the best, if not THE best.

With "only" 100 slots to work with, there are tough choices to be made in deciding who to include, and Stokes makes those choices well. He covers most of the big names in philosophy proper, and he also broadens the reader's horizons by including many thinkers who wouldn't normally be classified as philosophers, such as Thomas More, Newton, Adam Smith, Wollstonecraft, Comte, Lenin, Freud, Jung, Vygotsky, Durkheim, Einstein, Turing, and Skinner.

Stokes covers each thinker in just about one page of text (fairly small font), which could be seen as an insurmountable challenge, but he rises to the occassion. He has the discernment to convey the key points which make each thinker stand out, and he does it with concise yet entertaining prose. No, he doesn't work miracles and tell you everything you might want to know about each thinker in such a short space, but he still covers a lot of ground and goes well beyond just whetting your appetite. In short, he cuts to the chase, and that has considerable value if you don't have the time and/or interest to wade through long and difficult texts.

Highly recommended to anyone interested in (Western) philosophy and intellectual history. This book is written with a skill which enables it to work for everyone from motivated young people to mature readers with a substantial philosophy background.

I love these type books. This work contains brief portraits of 100 different thinkers. I use these type books to determine who I will research next. I've written a similar book entitled "Noble's Notes on Famous Folks" which will be in publication soon. My effort is much lighter yet filled with facts also. Of course, as with all these interpretive biographies,it will be filled with the author's prejudices. Mr. Stokes has, of course, viewed many of these thinkers according to his own personal insight. I didn't find anything upsetting. I think Mr. Stokes did a fine job. I have found many new and interesting characters that I want to learn more about and isn't that the whole point of such books - to stimulate the curiosity of others.

Richard Noble - The Hobo Philosopher - Author of:

"Hobo-ing America: A Workingman's Tour of the U.S.A.."

If you want to read a relatively quick review of philosophical thought and inquiry of the past 2000+ years, this book is a perfect starting point.

Each thinker's lifetime work is outlined--not too long, not too short--and made accessible to anyone who is interested.

5/5.

Excellent book for the beginner in philosophy. Format very appealing,friendly and short. Especially good are the inclusion of the most influential present day philosophers and most influential books they have written. Good notes on who influence them and who they influenced for those interested tracing history of ideas and wish to go further.
Roland R. Kratzner

while this book may seem excellent from the point of view of the beginner, it is subtly riddled with the personal bias of the author, sometimes subjective, sometimes plain incorrect.

Newcomers to philosophy should steer clear of this book, and look for a proper, objective analysis

This book uses a monumentally biographical way to sum up what we know of philosophy. Individuals sometimes possess great charm, and being able to think better, faster, more, etc. than anyone else can be quite attractive. Unfortunately, we live in such a comic society that philosophy can only maintain its seriousness by sneaking off into a corner where it pays as little attention to everything else as possible. A quick comparison with how popular fun things like a song by The Cars called `You Might Think' could be, or used to be, in the case of The Cars, shows how this book approaches philosophers the way a humorous rock 'n' roll song attempts to capture its listeners:

you might think it's foolish
or maybe it's untrue
you might think I'm crazy
but all I want is you (Written by Ric Ocasek, 1983)

Before comedians could make more money writing movies and songs than books, some were so frustrated that they wrote about philosophy. At first I thought an intelligently comical review of PHILOSOPHY 100 ESSENTIAL THINKERS would have to top the book itself by showing how comic most stories about the old masters in the tradition of LIVES FROM PLUTARCH have been. Some of those old books have been in the library so long that just allowing books like that one to automatically fall open to the place where it has been read most often reveals the funniest places. It would be even more challenging to show how modern media allow individuals to achieve fame for a range of achievements that make the limited scope of philosophy all but disappear, utterly surrounded by all the newer possibilities, but PHILOSOPHY 100 ESSENTIAL THINKERS by Philip Stokes doesn't have an index, so it would take a tremendous level of familiarity with the book just to get started on that project.

Fortunately for the rest of the world, this is just a review, and what I know about music is Schopenhauer played flute. I also have a CD of things Nietzsche played on the piano before he discovered that he was not going to be a composer. As my interest in the song, `You Might Think' should indicate, I am interested in music because it allows an individual to express ideas in a form in which the composer actually imagines having some impact on listeners, a concept which becomes more unlikely with each passing hour, or even one more verse:

you might think it's hysterical
but i know when you're weak
you think you're in the movies
and everything's so deep
but i think that you're wild
when you flash that fragile smile
you might think it's foolish
what you put me through
you might think i'm crazy
but all i want is you.

Philip Stokes manages to find the opposite lesson in the works of Schopenhauer. "In music and the arts we can contemplate the universal will apart from our own individual strivings." (p. 105). This was before individuals found a way to soundtrack everywhere they might be going, and it was discovered that people had limits to what they were willing to listen to 24/7. Contemplation has been of far more use to philosophers than to anyone else, and it is difficult to imagine anything that the 100 Essential Thinkers in this book have been essential for, other than a history of interesting thoughts. Nietzsche once thought about writing this kind of book about the pre-Platonic philosophers, which takes this book up to page 21. Given the basic information, the question of how useful such a book might become kept him from proceeding further.

There are some real scientists in this book: the mathematician Pythagoras, astronomers Copernicus and Galileo, Sir Isaac Newton, naturalist Charles Darwin, psychoanalysts Freud and Jung, economist John Maynard Keynes, linguists Ferdinand de Saussure and Noam Chomsky, but the closer this book gets to the present, the more controversies about science expressed by writers like Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn become important to how we think about things. Sticking to a particular a particular form of evaluation gets tougher the closer we get to Burrhus Frederic Skinner (1904-1990) with his explanations of `operant conditions' (p. 201) in place of assumed psychological experiences which "are irrelevant to a proper scientific understanding of human behaviour." (p. 201).

That song, `You might think,' has a bridge before the final verse:

and it's so hard to take
there's no escape without a scrape
you kept it going till the sun fell down
you kept it going

you might think i'm delirious
the way i run you down
but somewhere sometime
when you're curious
i'll be back around . . .

Chance put this book in my hands the same day I listened to the Heartbeat City album by The Cars, but I could give you the chorus of a really popular song from Paul Simon in 1975 to show how our society thinks, with a poke at all the people in this book:

You just slip out the back, Jack
Make a new plan, Stan
You don't need to be coy, Roy
Just get yourself free
Hop on the bus, Gus
You don't need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, Lee
. . .