so-so. The author seems so dedicated to selling the listener on Churchill's greatness, and functionally flawless man, that everything else takes the backseat. In addition not acknowledging mistakes or flaws in his character, for me, undercut and discredited the praise. Fears goes so far as to suggest that Churchill is blameless in his greatest debacle, Gallipoli. Churchill was possibly a great man, but he is certainly a more complex and interesting man than presented in this material. It's like listening to a super fan talk about the band they like, at first their passion is exciting, but soon they seem more blinded by their admiration than enlightened.
If they were really interested in him it's quick and easy. I would give them a few caveats though.
The Hitler stuff.
Nope. Well, he dies in the end.
If you don't mind the hero worship (I did maybe just personal taste) there is a lot of information in here, but the conclusions are often unsatisfying.
I am fascinated by philosophy and it's history, but this treatment of it was an incredible waist of time. You hear very little interesting substance of philosophy. Also, let it be noted this is all Western Philosophy, which is fine, but philosophically speaking India and China were centuries ahead of the west for most of human history and that's where a lot of the good stuff is. There was also a Christian bent to the lecture which was distracting. It was weird to hear someone teach philosophy, while maintaining a religious circular logic. In fact in his grand conclusion for how to live the best life (as if there is one answer for everyone) he claims that happiness would be to live the life of Mother Teresa. This is a perfect example with the problem with Daniel Robinson. Mother Teresa struggled with horrible lifelong depression and misery (read her letters if you don't believe me.) I'm not sure if Robinson is unaware of this, if he thinks happiness is irrelevant to a good life, or if he simply thinks his listeners aren't aware. Either way, his conclusions are strange and he seems to try to wrap philosophy into a justification for Christianity. I'm not trying to knock his beliefs, but if I had to listen to class on philosophy as a way of justifying Islam or zoroastrianism I would find it pretty useless too. I don't know how this guy got to teach a class in anything.
Generally I love the great courses and look forward to the next one I listen to.
If the professor had stuck with philosophy and kept the theology to himself.
Instead try "Philosophy of Mind: Brains, Consciousness, and Thinking Machines" or just do Will Durant
Report Inappropriate Content