47 of 53 people found the following review helpful
Witty? Yes. But vague and insufficient as well.,
This review is from: The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (Hardcover)
I own and have been extremely happy with Oxfords "Dictionary of World Religions" (J. Bower ed.) and was hoping for something similar with Blackburn's dictionary. However, I'm sadly disappointed. Rather than the concise, informative, flowing style of Bowker's work, I find broad generalizations, questions rather than statements and several entries ended in "this is much debated."
Of course, to those completely new to Philosophy this may be far more useful than direct, clear definitions of terms, but to any student of philosophy, this text will soon prove more frustrating than useful.
I would suggest the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, (R. Audi ed.) for a much broader, clearer, (albeit less charming) Dictionary.
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Oct 6, 2010 1:42:32 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 10, 2010 7:41:32 AM PDT
Hector Andres Mayoral says:
I've been looking for a good dictionary of Philosophy, not because I am a philosophy student (Though I am taking theory of knowledge in college right now), but I've have moderate exposure to the field, I've studied the Plato, Aristotles, Sextus Empiricus as well as Descartes, Hume, Lock, and Leibniz (But in more layman terms than the actual text). I just finished Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and Quine's Two Dogma's of Empricism... Oh and Kripke's A priori, necessity and contigency... Now I didn't get the last too very well, specially Quine's, So after all this text... Would you recommend this dictionary or Cambridge's? I just want to get the best bang for me buck! Thanks mate! (Or I could check if they have them in Borders... Might not though)
BRR! I just checked... They do not!
‹ Previous 1 Next ›