What do you think?
Rate this book
The Classical Mind
Exhaustive collection of western philosophy including Aristotle, Atomism, Socrates and pre-Socrates, Sophists, Euripides, War and Man, Violence and Education, Plato, Lucrecius, Animal Drives and Practical Reason, Logic, Art Theory, Cicero, Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, Plotinus, The Jesus Movement, Jesus and the Jewish Heritage, The Mystery Cults, Neoplatonism, Augustine, Paul, Heresy and Orthodoxy, Salvation , Free Will, Feudalism, Chivalry, John Scotus Erigena, Abelard, predestination, Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus, Averroists, Machiavelli, Humanism, Locke, Kepler, Galileo, William Gilbert, Leonardo, Copernicus, Luther, Hobbes, Descartes, Parallelism, Spinoza, Leibniz,Berkeley, Kant Kierkegaard, Neitzche, Hegel, SChopenhauer, William James, C.S. Peirce, F.H. Bradlye, Dewey, Whitehead, Moore, Realism, Frege, Russell, Tractatus, Vienna Circle, Husserl, Heidegger...
378 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 1969
22 people are currently reading
611 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
April 21, 2020
So I was looking over my bookshelves, trying to pick out my next "serious" book to read, when I came across the five-volume W. T. Jones series on the history of philosophy that I had read some 40 years ago at the College of Alameda. Since then, I've read a lot of philosophy books, and many by the thinkers themselves, and I confess that the outline of the philosophical project had gotten a little blurry over time. So why not, I thought, go back to this survey of Western philosophy, both to sharpen my own focus and also see how these books held up?
After volume one, I'm happy to report that Jones is a good writer, and his survey -- necessarily brief in some aspects -- accords with my own takeaways from pre-Socractic thought and later engagements with Plato and Aristotle. Granted, Jones has opinions that may not be universally shared, but his readings are far from casual and his summaries accurate, from my point of view. (Due to another project, I've spent more time reading ancient philosophers than any others, so I do have some background in this area.)
On another level, "The Classical Mind" also reinforces Alfred North Whitehead's famous dictum that Western philosophy is "a series of footnotes to Plato," as the issues he dealt with are still the ones we struggle with today. (That said, Aristotle's contribution cannot be discounted, as I had forgotten the breadth and depth of his work until I re-read this book.) Of course, those issues were raised before Plato, but his writings are the first ones we have in the Western tradition, and are the most accessible to Western readers.
Finally, though "The Classical Mind" is part of a college textbook series, and that shows in many ways, it is still a valuable and interesting tour through the early development of philosophical thought, and shows how increasing sophistication has not necessarily advanced our understanding as much as we may have hoped. And unlike my undergraduate days, I'm looking forward to the next four volumes -- especially as there won't be any tests or papers involved.
After volume one, I'm happy to report that Jones is a good writer, and his survey -- necessarily brief in some aspects -- accords with my own takeaways from pre-Socractic thought and later engagements with Plato and Aristotle. Granted, Jones has opinions that may not be universally shared, but his readings are far from casual and his summaries accurate, from my point of view. (Due to another project, I've spent more time reading ancient philosophers than any others, so I do have some background in this area.)
On another level, "The Classical Mind" also reinforces Alfred North Whitehead's famous dictum that Western philosophy is "a series of footnotes to Plato," as the issues he dealt with are still the ones we struggle with today. (That said, Aristotle's contribution cannot be discounted, as I had forgotten the breadth and depth of his work until I re-read this book.) Of course, those issues were raised before Plato, but his writings are the first ones we have in the Western tradition, and are the most accessible to Western readers.
Finally, though "The Classical Mind" is part of a college textbook series, and that shows in many ways, it is still a valuable and interesting tour through the early development of philosophical thought, and shows how increasing sophistication has not necessarily advanced our understanding as much as we may have hoped. And unlike my undergraduate days, I'm looking forward to the next four volumes -- especially as there won't be any tests or papers involved.
January 28, 2020
Felsefe tarihi hakkında okuduğum en kapsamlı ve özenli eserdi. Temin etmekte çok zorlandım ancak okurken her kuruşunun hakkını verdi. Meselelerin ve kişilerin sadece felsefi yönüyle değil siyasi, toplumsal ve bilimsel yönleri üzerinde de durması ayrıca güzel. Anlatımı çok başarılı. Çevirisi de sıkıntı çıkarmadı.
January 11, 2023
Rules do not Justify Reasoning. Reasoning Justifies the Rules.
I believe that Sextus Empiricus commits an intellectual error in his discussion about the infinite regress of logical criterion or rules. This can be found on page 349 of the text. This error is still with us today. I would like to have seen Professor Jones discuss this point further. However, this book is still an excellent survey of classical thought and I highly recommend it.
It is important to realize that conclusions drawn from the criterion or rules of logic are not valid due to some other set of rules. Rather, it is the case that the rules of logic are valid because they are welded to reality. The rules themselves do not function in the validity of an inference. The rules represent reality itself. The rules are drawn from the observed patterns of reality. In a sense, they are not rules at all, they are simply features of reality; a description of patterns found to be true in reality. For example, Modus Pones is such a criterion or rule. What justifies the ‘rule’ of Modus Pones’? The answer is that the ‘rule’ does not need justification. It is not a rule so much as it is simply the name we use for a pattern found in nature. So called rules such as Modus Pones, non-contraction, identity, excluded middle are simply features of nature.
The intellectual error is to assert that the rules of logic rest on still more fundamental rules and then proceed to doubt the conclusions drawn from valid application of rules such as Modus Pones and fall into the trap of infinite regress. The mistake here is to think that reasoning depends on the rules and then proceeding to ask by what reasoning do we justify the rules. This is a deep philosophical error that leads to the dead-end of the infinite regress. It is the rules that depend on reasoning. The mistake is to think that an inference depends on the rules when it is really the rules that depends on the inferences drawn from reality itself. When we fail to recognize this, laws can become lawful by excluding that facts of existence. There is a point where bottom line brute reality provides a full stop to the regress. Rules do not justify reasoning. Reasoning justifies the rules.
A point is reached where you find that, that is just the way nature, the world and reality work. That is, at bottom you reach the point of brute reality. There is no further regression
I believe that Sextus Empiricus commits an intellectual error in his discussion about the infinite regress of logical criterion or rules. This can be found on page 349 of the text. This error is still with us today. I would like to have seen Professor Jones discuss this point further. However, this book is still an excellent survey of classical thought and I highly recommend it.
It is important to realize that conclusions drawn from the criterion or rules of logic are not valid due to some other set of rules. Rather, it is the case that the rules of logic are valid because they are welded to reality. The rules themselves do not function in the validity of an inference. The rules represent reality itself. The rules are drawn from the observed patterns of reality. In a sense, they are not rules at all, they are simply features of reality; a description of patterns found to be true in reality. For example, Modus Pones is such a criterion or rule. What justifies the ‘rule’ of Modus Pones’? The answer is that the ‘rule’ does not need justification. It is not a rule so much as it is simply the name we use for a pattern found in nature. So called rules such as Modus Pones, non-contraction, identity, excluded middle are simply features of nature.
The intellectual error is to assert that the rules of logic rest on still more fundamental rules and then proceed to doubt the conclusions drawn from valid application of rules such as Modus Pones and fall into the trap of infinite regress. The mistake here is to think that reasoning depends on the rules and then proceeding to ask by what reasoning do we justify the rules. This is a deep philosophical error that leads to the dead-end of the infinite regress. It is the rules that depend on reasoning. The mistake is to think that an inference depends on the rules when it is really the rules that depends on the inferences drawn from reality itself. When we fail to recognize this, laws can become lawful by excluding that facts of existence. There is a point where bottom line brute reality provides a full stop to the regress. Rules do not justify reasoning. Reasoning justifies the rules.
A point is reached where you find that, that is just the way nature, the world and reality work. That is, at bottom you reach the point of brute reality. There is no further regression
July 15, 2020
Generally speaking, if a book takes five years to read it is difficult to assess the whole book. As such, I could only really assess from Aristotle to The Stoics and even then that would be pointless. This was one of my History of Philosophy textbooks from college and I decided 5 years ago to reread all of my college textbooks. Obviously my plans morphed and changed. Hence, the five years. But it is not a habit of mine to not finish a book I begin.
One interesting passage struck me in light of all the events occurring in 2020. “In criticizing this point of you it is only fair to remember that Aristotle‘s notion‘s about slavery must have seem to his contemporaries dangerously radical. His distinction between natural masters an actual masters was implicitly in attack on the whole institution of slavery; hence it was a great advance over the facile assumption of the average Greek that masters are masters and slaves are slaves. Thus a philosophical theory that is used at one time as an elaborate rationalization for prejudice can become, at a later time, the point around which insights are condensed.” (Jones, 303). It seemed to resonate with me as I fear America is on the rampage, seeking to toss out not only the baby with the bath water, but the bassinet and the faucet as well.
One interesting passage struck me in light of all the events occurring in 2020. “In criticizing this point of you it is only fair to remember that Aristotle‘s notion‘s about slavery must have seem to his contemporaries dangerously radical. His distinction between natural masters an actual masters was implicitly in attack on the whole institution of slavery; hence it was a great advance over the facile assumption of the average Greek that masters are masters and slaves are slaves. Thus a philosophical theory that is used at one time as an elaborate rationalization for prejudice can become, at a later time, the point around which insights are condensed.” (Jones, 303). It seemed to resonate with me as I fear America is on the rampage, seeking to toss out not only the baby with the bath water, but the bassinet and the faucet as well.
June 21, 2020
My favorite history of philosophy, this is a rigorous but readable source for understanding the essential ideas of major philosophers. This volume includes excellent commentaries on both Aristotle and Plato. But it also covers the Presocratics and other philosophers preceding Plato and concludes with a discussion of the late Classical period. The Roman era is included with coverage of Cicero, Marcus Aurelius and stoicism. The volume is enhanced with a glossary and valuable suggestions for further readings by topic. I have found this an excellent reference work ever since my college days.
April 6, 2021
It is a very good book. W.T Jones is very good at presenting the different schools and then separating his evaluation of them from the explanation. If you want to get a sense of Greek philosophy this is the book for you. It could however use a better ending
December 15, 2017
W.T. Jones' first volume of his A History of Western Philosophy series cannot be compared favourably to Copleston's lucid and profound text, nor to Russell's readable and engagingly light history/introduction. Jones operates in the middle ground between Copleston's depth and Russell's brevity.
The one advantage that Jones provides, especially in the first volume, is his extended use of extended primary sources and quotations. I would hazard a rather unscientific guess that roughly one third of the first volume is primary source quotes, while the other two thirds are Jones' brief outlines of the philosophers and their central ideas.
Jones also does a good job throughout the series balancing the philosophers and focusing on the major players and the major themes. One volume for the Classical period, one for the Medieval, one for Hobbes to Hume and finally one from Kant to Wittgenstein and Sartre strikes a good balance, not overemphasizing or ignoring any period. He later added the fifth volume Quine to Derrida bringing the series relatively up-to-date.
The first volume The Classical Mind includes chapters on:
The one advantage that Jones provides, especially in the first volume, is his extended use of extended primary sources and quotations. I would hazard a rather unscientific guess that roughly one third of the first volume is primary source quotes, while the other two thirds are Jones' brief outlines of the philosophers and their central ideas.
Jones also does a good job throughout the series balancing the philosophers and focusing on the major players and the major themes. One volume for the Classical period, one for the Medieval, one for Hobbes to Hume and finally one from Kant to Wittgenstein and Sartre strikes a good balance, not overemphasizing or ignoring any period. He later added the fifth volume Quine to Derrida bringing the series relatively up-to-date.
The first volume The Classical Mind includes chapters on:
1) Pre-Socratic Philosophy
2) Education Through Violence
3) Atomism
4) Plato: the Theory of Forms
5) Plato: the Special Sciences
6) Aristotle: Metaphysics, Natural Science, Logic
7) Aristotle: Ethics, Politics, Art
8) The Late Classical Period
November 30, 2023
Took me more time than usual but that is because I space out my readings to align with the classes. W.T Jones was an apt companion for my philosophy classes with Dr. Andrew Bernstein and Prof. Carrie-Ann Biondi. In addition to what they taught about the main thinkers - The Pre-Socratics, Plato and Aristotle, I thoroughly enjoyed W.T. Jones' take on some of the left-outs such as Homer, Hesiod, Cicero, Aurelius and the rest.
Admittedly, the final chapters were short but that was only because Jones skillfully laid down the basics and premises in earlier chapters in a way that he didn't have to repeat things when he came to summarise the post- Aristotelian world after Roman Imperium.
Admittedly, the final chapters were short but that was only because Jones skillfully laid down the basics and premises in earlier chapters in a way that he didn't have to repeat things when he came to summarise the post- Aristotelian world after Roman Imperium.
August 30, 2019
This book is made up of a third on Plato and a third on Aristotle sandwiched between philosophical developments pre-Plato and post-aristotle.
Your ideas drive your life. And it's been empowering to get context on where popular ideas today were founded. I love Raphael's painting of Plato and Aristotle together, the teacher pointing to the sky and his best pupil pointing to the ground, representing where each derives truth and ethics.
Lot's to learn. Here's my Notes from the book:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C...
Your ideas drive your life. And it's been empowering to get context on where popular ideas today were founded. I love Raphael's painting of Plato and Aristotle together, the teacher pointing to the sky and his best pupil pointing to the ground, representing where each derives truth and ethics.
Lot's to learn. Here's my Notes from the book:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C...
August 6, 2022
This is a lucid and engaging overview of the philosophy of Ancient Greece. It covers the pre-Socratics, goes in depth into Plato and Aristotle, and also discusses the post-Alexandrinian Hellenic schools of Skepticism, Stoicism, and Epicureanism. I really enjoyed this brisk and educational read.
May 21, 2014
Ugh..
There is a need for a good series on comprehensive philosophy, very much indeed. But Jones is not a wise choice to satisfy this need. I can only recommend Copleston instead. This work of Jones is faulty, confusing and his writing is unorderly. Although his writing gets better in his later works, this is a very bad start. Not suitable for beginners, but could maybe be useful for the novice as a complementary work. But the price-tag simply does not justify. Avoid and go Copleston instead.
There is a need for a good series on comprehensive philosophy, very much indeed. But Jones is not a wise choice to satisfy this need. I can only recommend Copleston instead. This work of Jones is faulty, confusing and his writing is unorderly. Although his writing gets better in his later works, this is a very bad start. Not suitable for beginners, but could maybe be useful for the novice as a complementary work. But the price-tag simply does not justify. Avoid and go Copleston instead.
August 4, 2007
I took an intro to philosophy in my early years in the Univ of Oslo. It was obligatory and not a few fellow students fussed about it. I, a little strangely, found it interesting. It was my first formal exposure to the western philosophy.
Had to read this book, some chapters are obligatory, some others I did if for fun when I had the time :-)
Not so easy reading though......
Had to read this book, some chapters are obligatory, some others I did if for fun when I had the time :-)
Not so easy reading though......
January 25, 2010
this was a reader in my "anciet philosophy" class as an undergraduate at thepontifical college, John Klienz was the professor. it has numerous markings and underlings thrughout.
if i tried to capsulize "what i learned from this book", i'm afraid i would be writing for days and slip into a vally of rememberances and nostalgia.
if i tried to capsulize "what i learned from this book", i'm afraid i would be writing for days and slip into a vally of rememberances and nostalgia.
December 24, 2018
Not an easy read. My philosophy class started in chapter 4 which is about Plato, and I was lost! I read the first three chapters and then chapter 4 came alive for me. Now I understand the need for Plato's Theory of Forms. The second time reading about Plato's works was easier and actually interesting.
January 26, 2016
Wonderful comprehensive book of the earlier philosophers and their teachings. Here it is 2016 and it seems very sad that after all these years the western philosophy has brought us to the point that america may actually vote an idiot and fool as their leader. Unbelievable !!!!!!!
I suppose Robert Maynard Hutchins had it right in his wonderful book 'Education For Freedom'.
I suppose Robert Maynard Hutchins had it right in his wonderful book 'Education For Freedom'.
August 24, 2022
This 5-volume series has the advantage of having lengthy excerpts (where available) from original sources. It is annoying how slanted the author's comments are by his own, unarticulated philosophy and assumptions. The series is, in my opinion, only worth owning for its selections of original material.
April 7, 2008
Well written history of philosophy from Thales through to the late Classical Period. Jones places too much focus on the political and moral philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, while other areas get short changed; especially the Epicureans and the Stoics.
August 31, 2008
Great look at Western Philosophy
November 12, 2014
standard textbook material for an undergraduate course, perhaps. good narrative coverage of the principals; needs supplements with, yaknow, the texts themselves.
Read
February 13, 2013I need this book in pdf format could anyone help me?
send to org1989@yahoo.com
plus 0559343567
0073407534
I would greatly appreciate for the help in getting these philosophy books
send to org1989@yahoo.com
plus 0559343567
0073407534
I would greatly appreciate for the help in getting these philosophy books
March 27, 2018
This book has been in my library for some time and I have used it as a reference book. Since I am discarding many of my reference books due to online resources, I decided to read this straight through to see if I wanted to keep it.
I am a liberal arts major not philosophy. And I can't comment on the translations quoted from various sources.
I did find the book readable and entertaining. It is not just commentary but a source book with extensive quotations from the authors when available.
I would recommend it for non-specialists that are especially interested in Plato and Aristotle and are seeking the historical and cultural context for the classical period of philosophy.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews