A Short History Of Modern Philosophy (Routledge Classics) (2001) - Plot & Excerpts
A superbly engaging summary of Western philosophy, starting from a brief recap of post-Hellenistic thought (Scruton comes to the defense of the medieval scholastics, showing how their work pre-empted many recent ideas) and then getting into depth from Descartes onwards, culminating in Wittgenstein and the modern conception of philosophy of language. The author's breadth of knowledge is incredible, and he uses his broader understanding of the History of Ideas to inform his portrayal of individual philosophers - showing how Hegel's Idealism was influenced by and influenced German Romaticism, or how Hobbes' skepticism about people's innate goodness emerged from the political turbulence which he experienced. In a fascinating introduction, he analyses the relation between philosophy and the history of philosophy (a far more critical one than that between, say, physics and the history of physics). Since philosophy is not a progression, but a series of iterations on the same themes, the ideas contained in Plato or Descartes are as relevant today as ever. However, there is an important distinction between the history that is relevant to a philosopher, and that which is of interest to the historian of ideas. The idea, to use Scruton's example, of there being more than one God, while of great historical importance, need no longer detain the student of philosophy for very long.As one of the most prominent Anglophone philosophers to deal with aesthetics, Scruton is ideally posed to present both the Continental and the Analytical traditions fairly - giving a far more nuanced presentation, for example, of the ideas of Hegel than Bertrand Russell's pugnacious history does. The presence of that latter book appears quite a few times here: Scruton uses Russell as a foil, receiving from him his humourous, clear style, yet maintaining a commitment to a semblance of ecumenicalism.Still, this book is not entirely without subjectivity. Often Scruton couches his logical flow in a sort of dialectic between a philosopher and a sceptical interlocutor - and shows his own preference by his choice of whom to award the last word. (Sections ending in a philosopher seeming to be a mess of contradictions are dismayingly common.) But it is inevitable that one should show prejudice when schematising a view one finds inadmissible, and Scruton is careful to bring out the heritage of each thinker he presents, both from a historical and a contemporary perspective.The presentations of Leibniz and Spinoza in particular are a masterwork of clarity, and the section on Kant is as good as can be expected, when dealing with ideas the meaning of which nobody is actually sure. I got bogged down, surprisingly, in the section on Locke and Berkeley. But the book's brevity, felicity of prose and connectedness of ideas helped me get through even the thorniest parts. For a summary of Western philosophy for the informed amateur, I couldn't recommend anything better.
A good overview of a wide range of modern philosophers. It helps that Scruton is knowledgeable, clear thinking and has a clear and confident writing style. This sort of book needs clarity, not tentative views. Scruton has his biases, but they are so well known and therefore apparent and mostly harmless. By presenting this as a history Scruton is able to contrast and compare a range of philosophers and explain the development of (European) philosophy.In detail, I particularly liked the parts on Kant, Frege and Wittgenstein. These give a taste of very complex thinking in a relatively straightforward and understandable way (though take the word "relatively" in this sentence seriously!). I was less enamoured of the parts covering Hegel and Phenomenology, as they were less insightful for me, but then perhaps this may be because they are quite impenetrable without lots more work. Sections on the British Empiricists were good - although if this is your interest Priests "The British Empiricists" is better.A word of caution though - this is not a book for the complete philosophy novice, even if it is called an introduction. It does assume a certain level of familiarity with some, albeit basic, philosophical terminology and concepts.
What do You think about A Short History Of Modern Philosophy (Routledge Classics) (2001)?
So, I've used this work in two different papers; one over Kant and his attempt at solving the problems of Cartesian Scepticism and Humean Empiricism via the "Transcendental Apperception..." and another over Wittgenstein and the possibilities of "Private Language." The essays over Kant and Wittgenstein were both very informative and really, at least in my opinion, represented the aforementioned philosopher's arguments quite well. Overall, I'd highly recommend this book to those who are looking to bone up on their Modern Philosophy, for it is written in a very accessible manner. I hope to use this work again the next time I'm working within Modern Philosophy.
—Jacob Stubbs
Perhaps one would think that everything was clear and dandy here would be the ideal state to be left when done reading such a book. Instead there is much that requires more investigation on my part and this I think this book provided where to go. While I was aware of many of these philosophers, the book provided many threads between them and how they developed, dis- and reappeared . Despite the author known as being a "conservative", he was less critical of Marx than one might imagine. In fact he had little to direct against him. Perhaps with Phenomenology is where his biases showed the most. Not hearing these sides of the arguments in the past, it was nevertheless quite useful and informative to understand the arguments put forth on both sides.
—Kraig Grady
