Customer Reviews

Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?: 23 Questions from Great Philosophers

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Most of us would probably pick up a book like this because we are looking for answers about the meaning of life, or something like that. But instead of answers, Professor Kolakowski offers more questions. He introduces us to one thought or concept from each of 23 philosophers and then, in Socratic style, gives the reader some questions to answer.

This little book is both challenging and enjoyable to read, a real thought-provoker.

This small book of brief philosophical portraits is great fun. Important to emphasize, however, the smallness of the book and the brief nature of the portraits provided. As Kolakowski points out in his introduction to the book: "This little book is not meant as some sort of super-condensed textbook, encyclopaedia or dictionary. If a student attempted to sit an exam on the basis of these essays, he would be disappointed: he would fail." That caveat notwithstanding, these little essays (none of them longer than 10 pages) provide succinct snapshots of most of the great philosophers in the European tradition. Not so much a book of philosophy, it's a book about philosophers and their "great ideas", each presentation gets to the heart of the philosopher's key ideas, and each concludes with provocative questions for readers to ponder.
For some hard to fathom reason, Basic Books chose to eliminate 7 of Kolakowski's portraits, portraits that can be found in the Polish original. The seven portraits left on the cutting room floor are those of Aristotle, Meister Eckhart, Nicolas of Cusa, Hobbes, Heidegger, Jaspers and Plotinus. Chiefly for that reason (what in the world were they thinking?), this volume loses a star.

This small book properly can be called a "diamond in the rough." For all rolled into one, is a clever yet understandable analysis of philosophy, "Cold War politics" and religion. In fact, here we get to see what philosophers do at the office each day. They comb history for the arguments of the masters and then supplement them with the latest contemporary findings and meld them together to solve the problems of today.

Leszek Kolakowski, once one of Poland's most important philosophers - that is until he was banned from teaching and forced to immigrate to the West -- uses 23 questions here as a platform for probing more deeply into key questions that sit at the center of modern philosophy generally, and at the intersection of rationality and metaphysics in particular, to analyze the arguments of many traditional philosophers. All of this analysis is put to good use as they each prove to be pivotal to understanding the finer points of contemporary Western philosophy.

In each essay a wide range of issues that interest the author are examined and analyzed. And although some of the discussions are clearer and better argued (and thus were more valuable to this reader than others), they all are clear and understandable and coalesce around the very interesting issue of the nature and rationality of the existence of god, therefore the title of the book. Using the history of philosophy and the essays of a slew of philosophers as a guide to established Western philosophical literature, the author combs history to come to some rather unexpected conclusions. The most important of these becomes what could be considered the running theme of the book: that there is an irreducible religious presence in many intellectual arguments, in Western, as well as in non-Western societies.

Said somewhat differently, Kolakowski sees the structure and logic of religious thinking -- essentially metaphysical rather than analytic argumentation -- lurking in the background of some of the most avowedly rational, most secular and least metaphysical thinkers and political movements in existence during our contemporary times. A great deal of this obviously has been gleaned from philosophical history. One movement in particular that he knows a great deal about is Marxism. As well, he sees the same strain of thought among neoconservatives such as that of Francis Fukuyama, in his book "The End of History."

The author basically agues, that the structure of secular justifications and rationalizations are heavily weighted with ideas that are essentially metaphysical and thus religious in structure and import. And while the author leans heavily on Christian philosophers, he nevertheless makes clear that he is by no means a religious apologist, or a confirmed believer in a god (thus taking no position on the issue of God's existence). As a result, he does not shy away from drawing conclusions about the hidden premises of rationalists who are constantly seen trying to "distance" themselves from what are essentially non-rational and metaphysical arguments.

Using the philosophical frameworks, the deep shared experiences of Western philosophers and the argumentations of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine Aquinas, Descartes and Spinoza, Pascal, Hume, Schopenhauer and even Nietzsche and Husserl, he concludes that while scientific thinking may still be the Holy Grail of philosophic inquiry, and still the leader in setting contemporary philosophical standards, rational arguments can never succeed in proving or disproving the existence of god. That being the case, the author in a light-hearted aside, suggests that there can be no harm in hedging ones bets on the side of god's existence, for if he does not exist, what one believes does not really matter. While on the other hand, if he does exist, then disbelief could be a very costly proposition indeed.

Throughout it is an engaging book with just the right amount of grit and edgy provocation to keep the reader interested in what could have otherwise been very rough going. Four stars.

This is a relatively quick and interesting read. I am amazed that the editor cut the writer's essays on Aristotle (which would have demostrated the author's thoughts on the evolution of Scrates' and and Plato's philosophy), and also an essay on Meister Eckhart, one of my favorite spiritual thinkers. But worth the time to read to be exposed to the philosophy of some well-known thinkers, and some other more obscure thinkers over 2,500 years of human history.

This is an excellent book that I just couldn't quite give five stars to. First, let me tell explain the two things I found problematic with it.

The "God of Christianity" is featured far too much here. It necessarily dominates the discussions of many of his selections for study (Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, etc.), but he manages to drag Christianity into discussions where it seems completely unnecessary as well. Why is this needed (or even sound) in a book which is a sampling of philosophy? It almost, but not quite, gets to the point where it becomes a serious flaw with the book rather than just an annoyance.

In the introduction, the author states that he will concentrate on one idea in the thought of each philosopher, as trying to summarize each in a book such as this would be impossible. Given the natural space limitations of a book like this, that makes sense. But he nevertheless takes up space on a few of his selections by making controversial generalizations - not focusing on one idea - and then not having to defend these generalizations because of the space constraint. His treatment of Nietzsche was particularly glaring in this sense.

Nevertheless, this book is still a fine introduction to some of the problems which have been wrestled with during the history of western philosophy. And he does have a very nice way of fleshing out questions that are still interesting today. Take a look at his section on Plato for a good sample. Overall a fun and interesting read.

Very helpful in explaining the development of Western Civilization's reasoning on the meaning of life; is there a God; does man have free will; etc. Short chapters on dozens of philosophers and metaphysical thought ending with the authors questions about each philosophers musings. Nice little reference manual.

The original edition (Penguin, UK) had 30 essays, but this one had 7 of them, WITHOUT PREVIOUS ALERT, cut off!

I want to know what does the editor think of us, customers!

CAVEAT EMPTOR. The title of this book, "Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?", is derived from the question posed by Heidegger in his lecture, "What is Metaphysics?" Consequently, I looked forward to Kolakowski's "take" on Heidegger. I bought the book; scanned the contents, and found no Heidegger. It turns out that the original Polish edition had thirty essays. This English version excised seven of them, including the one on Heidegger.

UPDATE (1-25-10): Eric Edwards' recent post (January, 2010) got me re-interested in this book. Since the English translation was originally published in England (in 2007), I went to Amazon UK to see if there might be a new edition. Sure enough, the Brits must have received enough complaints, and in 2008 (that's two years ago, folks), Penguin Books published the book with all 30 essays, including the one on Heidegger. I ordered the book for 5.98 pounds, which (with shipping) came to $21.99 U.S. dollars; I received it about a week later. The Penguin edition is a paperback, but it's larger size makes for easier reading. Why U.S. bookstores are still selling the old edition might make for an interesting term paper.

Lastly, I would note that Kolakowski (whose penetrating criticisms of Marxism had a role to play in the Polish Solidarity movement) died in July of 2009. Tony Judt, in a glowing tribute in the "New York Review of Books" (Sept. 24, 2009), referred to him "as a true Central European intellectual--perhaps the last."

We are met on the battlefield of a great war. It was a poetic slaughter. Aristotle had to attempt a science of everything, but the essay on Aristotle was left out so the book could be tiny. There is some attempt to admit that power is likely to become the focus of a struggle that philosophers do not have an interest in winning. People who think they have found a mechanism to dominate more economic activities than they understand are warned about the cave Plato thinks they have chained people in. Plato wanted to win, so I quote:

There will be no salvation
for the world until it is
ruled by philosophers. (p. 29).

It is probably true that those who are
driven only by lust for power
and riches would, if they achieved
their goal and attained power,
soon bring about the downfall of society
as well as their own; but it does not follow
from this that those who care nothing for power
or riches would make splendid rulers
if by some miracle (for only a miracle
would bring it about) they could attain power.
The intellectual aristocracy is far
from being suitable for controlling
affairs of state. (p. 30).

Some people like to know what everybody is thinking, but when they use a telephone to ask people about Minnesota's tax dollars being used for a sex change operation, the failure of the Phallic Function makes most people realize that ideals become political when a society is striving for:

Liberty, equality, fraternity, vasectomy.

If you are really interested in exploring philosophy and critical questions from philosophy i suggest that you avoid this book. Not that it is badly written, or that is it is inaccurate. However, it too easily fits into the genre of "How to.." books or "Philosophy for Dummies", etc.
If you really want to "live dangerously" enroll in an intro philosophy course at a local college, or join a discussion club whereby philosophical texts can be reviewed and critiqued.
For example, use W. Kaufman's work on "Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre", that way you can concentrate on one contemporary school of thought before trying to tackle all the "big" questions in this little book.