Customer Reviews

Socrates: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)

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

 

 

This is the fifth Very Short Introduction I've read (others included Logic, Ancient Philosophy, Anthropology, and Sociology) and it is the first that wasn't fun to read. I think Taylor's style is too academic for a series like this. Sentences like "I do not wish to suggest that Plato had a clear grasp of the distinction between purely conceptual definitions and the substantive type of account exemplified by the cognitive theory" (60) require entirely too much examination and prior knowledge of the subject to be considered introductory material for most people reading without tutelage. And there are plenty of more detailed books alraedy available that are written in that style.

I do not wish to suggest that I'm an idiot, but I do look for something a bit more breezy in an introduction to a topic. I think many people turn to introductions because the original works can sometimes be a slog to read. I choose carefully which original works I'm going to make the effort to read, and I want introductions to material that will either a) bring me up to speed on things I don't have the time to read, b) give me basic information to choose more wisely which works to read or c) expand works I've already read. Having already read The Republic, I found that none of these 3 goals was accomplished by this volume. Its a shame, too, because VSI has been by far and away my favorite series of introductions. I hope they rethink this Socrates introduction and publish a new one aimed at a more general audience.

Prof. Taylor teaches philosophy at Oxford University, and clearly knows his subject. However, his writing style leaves much to be desired. He tends to be convoluted and verbose, with too many parentheses. This is fine for an academic paper, but not for "A Very Short Introduction". He is worst in the first three chapters, in which he reviews Socrates' life and historical context. His discussion of "the Socratic problem" in chapter 3 drags at times, but if you plow through it, ends up being actually pretty good. However, it does not compare for clarity and crispness of reasoning with the discussions of the problem by Prof. Vlastos.

Taylor's style does not improve in Chapter 4, on the Socrates of Plato, but I found that in spite of his occasional incoherence there is something of value in this chapter. He does a good job of laying out Plato's approach to the problem of the nature of morality, and his ultimate failure in that project. His comments on Plato's defense of Socrates against the Sophists are quite good, although I've just started The Republic myself, so I may have to revise this opinion later.

Chapter 5, Socrates' influence on later philosophers, including the Skeptics, Cynics, and Stoics in the Hellenistic period, and then in the 19th century Hegel, Kierkegaard,and Nietzsche, was quite illuminating. All three 19th century philosophers were obsessed with Socrates, and each saw him and used him in his own unique way. He emphasizes the kinship between Socrates and Nietzsche in particular. This is clearly the area that interests Prof. Taylor most, where he put in most of his effort, with good and useful results. His style is noticeable tighter and clearer in this chapter.

Those who have no background in philosophy at all should not start with this book. Those who are in the process of learning some philosophy, perhaps at an intermediate level, should with a little patience find something of interest here. Those who wish to have a deeper understanding of Socrates life and thought should, after reading this book, by all means go on to read the two volumes of the master, Prof. Gregory Vlastos, Socrates: Ironist and Moral Philosopher, and Socratic Studies.

Taylor's SOCRATES is detailed and scholarly, and a useful work for those who have already had a fair amount of exposure to the Platonic dialogues. However, its level of technicality is liable to confuse and frustrate beginners, who just want a readable overview of who Socrates was and what he taught. Even these readers will benefit from the first chapter, which discusses the life of Socrates, but the following chapters, which deal with his thought and influence, will be heavy-going for the average reader. As such, this book is recommended to philosophers, but really is too advanced to qualify as a standard introduction.

This is book presents a comprehensive and very detailed introduction to Socrates. The book provides an overview of Socrates' life as well as an overview of the primary and secondary literature regarding Socratic scholarship. Socrates is one of most elusive philosophers of the Western tradition, given that he never wrote a single word. Primary knowledge of Socrates is derived from the Socratic dialogues of Plato and Xenophon, Aristophanes' comedy "The Clouds," and less significant references and fragments. Although I agree with other reviewers that this text is indeed too advanced for the introductory reader, it contains so much detailed information that it will prove to be a useful reference to be consulted over and over again for guidance. Taylor's navigation of Socratic literature (Ch. 3), although perhaps too ambitious for a short introduction, is impressive and shows the signs of true scholarship. As an "introduction for advanced readers," so to speak, the book is a success, given that it is saturated with detailed information regarding Socratic literature. However, for the introductory reader, such detailed information may be too overwhelming.

Socrates is of course one of the main figures in the history of philosophy, so much so that those that came before him are simply referred to collectively as "pre-Socratics." Yet, since the man himself didn't write anything down, it is difficult to know exactly what he thought and why. Moreover, while we have a few historical sources available, by far most of what we know about Socrates comes from the writings of his pupil, Plato, and those of course changed in content and emphasis over his lifetime, progressively getting away from Socratic thought while reflecting Plato's coming into his own as a mature philosopher. Still, C.C.W. Taylor does an admirable job at parsing the various sources, focusing on a subset of early Platonic dialogues that are most likely to reflect Socrates' teachings. Particularly interesting is the analysis of Socrates' defense at his trial, which is reported on and commented very differently by Xenophon and Plato (the latter wasn't present at Socrates' death because he was sick, but wrote the classic account of it nonetheless in the Phaedo). Socrates' life (and death), teachings, and even the fact that he didn't write anything down invite obvious comparisons with the figure of Jesus. If so, the ancient Greek wins the comparison hands down because of his much finer analysis of the human condition, and his far less annoying take on the divine.

Good book. Helps you understand Socrates a little better than by just reading his works.

Most of the books in the Past Masters series serve as excellent introductions to the profound insights and complex ideas produced by humanity's greatest thinkers. Cristopher Taylor's edition on Socrates is no exception. Perhaps the most important philosopher in history, the thoughts of Socrates remain as valuable today as they were more than two thousand years ago. Many of Socrates' ideas still serve as the foundation of much modern thought and retain the power to stimulate the most critical of intellects. Taylor does an excellent job of describing the many important aspects of both Socrates' life and his ideas. The book provides a short biography, examines the validity and reliability of what his contemporaries wrote about him (Socrates wrote nothing himself), examines his influence on Plato while exploring the distinctions between the two great thinkers, and provides a thorough and enlightening summation of Socrates' main ideas (especially in regards to ethics). This book should serve as an enjoyable and informative read for both the casual reader and the philosophical enthusiast.

Like so many classicists, Taylor's writing style will repel all but the most pedantic scholar. Instead of a book that engages general readers as well as scholars (it is possible to do both), this book is a dry summary. Taylor's narrow, unimaginative approach fails to capture the greatness of Socrates. The book also does not provide the historical context of ancient Athens that is important in understanding Socrates, the most inspiring philosopher in history. Interest in the classics has declined considerably in recent years. Sadly, this book will only contribute to the decline.

Chris Taylor has produced an apalling book. Impossible to read, convoluted and meandering, 'Socrates' appears designed to make philosophy less accessible to the average reader than more. It is strange that Oxford would publish such a jargon-filled book as an introduction. Most of the text deals with Socrates' background and his historical context. This is fine in theory, but leaves little space to explain the philosopher's work. When Taylor finally gets around to Socrates' position, he seems to assume that the reader has a full understanding of the philosophical lines of thought of the time (eg. the sophists, the cynics). I finished the book having no idea of the meaning of Socrates' key belief, that "knowledge is virtue". Taylor uses visual language that confuses rather than clarifies his arguments, such as "a keystone of the arch". The conclusion is a good example of Taylor's absurd style: "Every age has to recreate its own Socrates. What is his significance for a post-Christian, post-idealist epoch for whom neiher the figure of a precursor of Christ nor that of the embodiment of the world-spirit in its development of a higher form of consciousness has any meaning?"