The Problems of Philosophy discusses Bertrand Russell's views on philosophy and the problems that arise in the field. Russell's views focus on knowledge rather than the metaphysical realm of philosophy. The Problems with Philosophy revolves around the central question that Russell asks in his opening line of Chapter 1 - Is there any knowledge in the world which is so certain that no reasonable man could doubt it? He examines this question by delving into the idea of reality versus appearance, as for Russell and other philosophers who share his ideas it is sensory perception of the world around them that shapes their knowledge. It is in this work that he discusses his idea of sense-data to help explain the differences between appearance and reality. The Problems of Philosophy is Russell's first attempt at recording and working through a theory of epistemology, which is the theory of the nature of human knowledge.
Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) was an English philosopher, logician, mathematician, social critic, and historian. He is remembered as being a leader in the British revolt against idealism, as well as a founding father of the field of analytic philosophy. He was also well known for his very public anti-war and anti-imperialist stances.
Public Domain (P)2012 Enunciation LLC
As usual, Bertie employs his analytic style for which he is famous, while at the same time showing the reader why his other important work, 'A History of Western Philosophy', was an outstanding literary success. Russell seamlessly slices through difficult philosophy with succinct and relevant observations; he gives the reader a clear description (forgive the expression) of how complex ideas operate. The Third Earl is a master at synthesizing concepts, and knitting them together in manner which at first seems odd, but at last seems almost blatantly obvious. James Lagdon performs really well in this one, and apart from a few missed inflections, which one may forgive considering the nature of the subject, his voice is not a a nuisance, but in fact a delight when listening to things which are logically complex and somewhat mathematic-sounding. It comes, if you didn't already suspect, with my highest recommendation.
Oh yes. I like to listen to books like this just before I drift off to sleep. The ideas were stimulating and the voice droned a bit so it helped me to fall asleep in no time.
Basic ideas of philosophy that were reasonably clearly expressed.
Say something about yourself!
Time well spent, yes, but...Unless someone truly appreciates philosophy for what it is, and what it isn't, then this book probably will not be for you. Each chapter is in itself a premise to logically conclude a greater argument, which the author does very well.
The narration. The voice needed more emotion, energy and excitement in the subject matter. It felt dry, uninspired, and can lull the listener to sleep (which is bad for my 1-2 hr driving commute).
Good philosophical introduction
Russell himself, quite the "character"...
I always enjoy his attacks on pragmatists like me. He misunderstands and is unsympathetic to our view, but in a highly entertaining fashion.
You could, but if you're philosophically inclined you'll want to come back to it again.
Russell had his prejudices and blind-spots, and I prefer his popular essays ("Why I Am Not a Christian" etc.) and his book "Conquest of Happiness." But this is still great.
[In an earlier "review" I complained intemperately about the title error, listed initially on the audible site as "Problems With Philosophy"... don't know if that was somebody's idea of a joke or just a slip. I'm not even sure I didn't slip myself, and complain about the wrong "pronoun" when of course I meant "preposition". Anyway, as Russell would point out: to err is only human.]
The essay is going to be a good read for any one interested in epistemology and philosophy of science. Although the title refers to philosophy as a whole, virtually all the problems expanded on in this relatively short essay concern the problems of knowledge - that is what we can and cannot know and in what sens.
No. its philosophers philosophy containing little substance.
I get it, but i dont agree. Its over analyzing.
Good considering the thinking loops he had to relay.
Very interesting for sociology students and those who are interested in early philosophy. I suppose it's up to the individual to choose what is relevant and what is not.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.