Customer Reviews

Riddles of Existence: A Guided Tour of Metaphysics

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

 

 

From personal identity to time to "why not nothing?", Conee and Sider have cooked up an introduction to metaphysical questions that are a lot of fun. The chapters can be read (and re-read) in any order and thought about for a lifetime. The book is designed for a general audience - at least a general audience that likes to think philosophically. At the end of each chapter you will a helpful list of suggestions for further reading (mostly by contemporary philosophers).

Don't be fooled by other reviews! The book is neither difficult nor hard to follow. The prose is clear, engaging, and any steps in its arguments are logical, sensible, and clearly labelled (labels aren't always used and aren't rocket science, but help with recall; if you have trouble figuring out that "P2" can stand for "phase 2" then you might end up a little befuddled here and there). This book is suitable for any in high school or above, though it might be found attractive by a precocious middle-schooler. But while accessible to a wide audience, it isn't a "dumbed-down" approach to philosophy.

"Riddles of Existence" covers central problems in general metaphysics and in special metaphysics. These include the nature of personal identity, free will, fatalism, the existence of God, material constitution, universals and modality.
The problems and their proposed solutions are explained clearly and carefully, and the style is friendly and engaging. Conee and Feldman defend their own positions, and I often disagree with them, but I do not think that they are didactic; they usually treat alternative positions sympathetically and recommend further reading for each chapter.
The book is supposed to be accessible to those without any previous exposure to metaphysics or to philosophy more generally, and I think that it is the most accessible introduction available. To be sure, beginners may find some of the discussion, for example, of the ontological argument and of universals, quite difficult and demanding.
There is also what to my mind is an original formulation and treatment of the ontological argument, and the book may be of interest to more advanced readers. It also includes a chapter on the problem of why there exists anything at all, why there is something rather than nothing, which is typically neglected in introductions.
I think that this book is a fascinating and entertaining introduction for the general interested readers, and that it should also prove quite helpful to undergraduate philosophy students.

There's a number of problems with this book. First and foremost, it's not a guided tour, but mainly just proofs for everything the two authors believe, and dismissive claims against everything they don't. The book is overpriced for its slim size, and while styled as a gentle introduction for beginners without terminology, I had trouble even following arguments I already understood. Instead of lacking terminology, they would give bizarre labels to propositions like Srii11, without an explanation of what exactly the S, r, and i stand for (the 11, at least, was obviously due to it being the 11th statement...).

Moreover, the book is annoying. In the discussion of the cosmological argument for God (also known as the first cause argument), which roughly goes, "Everything effect we know of in science has a cause, therefore there was a first cause, which must necessarily lie outside of science.", they hand-wave / dismiss the claim that everything in the world has a cause thus proving the arguments invalidity, and later on casting serious doubt on the existance of God because of this proof of its falseness.

The problem, of course, is that in two other chapters, in which the authors are arguing against, say, Free Will, they take it as an immutable law that everything in the world has a cause and an effect.

There are good arguments against the Cosmological Argument for God, but they don't use them, instead basing their argument on a claim that they flat out claim is false in other chapters. There's at least one blindingly wrong argument the authors make in every chapter of the book. So reading the book with any level of critical thinking makes you just want to hurl it across the room in disgust.

I'd recommend Labyrinths of Reason insead.

I was somewhat disappointed in this book because it came across more as the author's opinions on the very complex subjects of Metaphysics rather than a theological treatment of the subject...In the end they "proved" nothing really - and left most questions open. I suspect - but certainly will not conclude - that they do not believe in a Supreem Being (i.e., God) (authors - if I am incorect in this suspicion my appologies) - and when you think about it - without this faith in God - indeed nothing can really be proven in the metaphysical world.

I found the chapter (as an example) on Free Will and Determination - especially laughable...The premise is that we live in a quantom mechanical world and if you could characterize all the atoms that exist in a person today - say 100 years ago - by causality you can determin what the person will do in their life...This to me is nonscencical and assums we are nothing more than purly mechanical beings - a bag of chemicals that learned to talk so to speak...Most reasonable people refruit this notion (as do I) - and rather believe that we are spiritual beings with free choice.

This is an OK book to read if you are already familiar with Metaphsics - but if you are new to this field I think it would be best to skip it until you establish other foundations and beliefs.....I would recommend: A course in Miricles, Oneness, and The One and the Many...And of course St. Thomas' original works.