Metafüüsika ülevaade

by E.J. Lowe, Märt Väljataga (Translator)

Metafüüsika aineks on tõeluse kui terviku fundamentaalne struktuur. E. J. Lowe’i „Metafüüsika ülevaade“ on asjatundlik ja usaldusväärne teejuht nüüdisaegsesse analüütilisse metafüüsikasse, mis käsitleb selle kõiki peamisi alasid. Raamat jaguneb kuude ossa ja kahekümnesse peatükki, keskendudes järgmistele teemadele: identsus ja muutus, paratamatus, olemus ja võimalikkus, põhjuslikkus, agentsus ja sündmused, aeg ja ruum ning universaalid ja partikulaarid. Kuigi ülevaade tutvustab mitmesuguseid seisukohti, ei taotle autor neutraalsust, vaid esitab ka omaenda positsiooni. Raamat sobib filosoofiaõppuritele ja huvilistele, kes soovivad nüüdismetafüüsikast süstemaatilist ülevaadet või arusaamist selle üksikküsimustest.
Edward Jonathan Lowe (1950–2014) oli Durhami ülikooli professor, kes tegi palju metafüüsika tagasitoomiseks ingliskeelse filosoofia keskmesse. Ta töötas välja nelja kategooria ontoloogia, mille järgi olev jaguneb liikideks, omadusteks, substantsideks ja troopideks. Eesti keeles on varem ilmunud Lowe’i „Sissejuhatus vaimufilosoofiasse“ (2008).

Genres: Philosophy, Metaphysics, Nonfiction, Academic, Spirituality

568 pages, Paperback

First published March 7, 2002

Reviews

[Serena Salvati · Rating 2 out of 5]

I suppose this is a good introductory book; I've been told it uses little jargon compared to other metaphysics texts. The title is misleading: it isn't a survey of metaphysics, it is mainly Lowe giving his opinions on a lot of metaphysical topics.

Poor opinions, and not necessarily well-argued opinions.

Lowe's "method" of arguing from common sense is not necessarily a bad one, but his common sense is not actually common. In many cases, he does not have a secondary argument for a claim besides his uncommon "common sense," leaving me and similarly-minded readers at a loss. Furthermore, he likes to ignore prominent scientific theories "for the sake of argument" which gets very tired very fast. Common sense is not a good argument when, for example, scientific proof goes against it (as it does in many cases).

Furthermore, Lowe doesn't know how to use colons, which makes for irritating reading.

[Richard Newton · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have read a couple of introductory textbooks on metaphysics, and this one stands up as good. It is relatively easy to read and of sufficient depth for an undergraduate metaphysics course (with some specific additional readings around topics of interest). I very occasionally found the writing style a little irritating - but that is probably just me. On the other hand, the introduction and the way it builds understanding are to be praised.

As it seems with any metaphysics book there is a choice of topics, which does not seem to cover the full spectrum of what might be considered as metaphysics. This book is good on identity and change, universals and particulars, necessity and possibility, space and time, and ok on causation. It misses out other topics such as mind-body problem, free will and determinism - so if these are of interest look elsewhere or be ready to buy an additional book or two.

[Christine · Rating 1 out of 5]

I think I got more out of reading the relevant articles the Stanford Encyclopedia... Which is free. Would not recommend it.

[Pedro Forquesato · Rating 4 out of 5]

Como um leigo interessado, esse livro me foi fácil de entender, e ainda assim profundo o suficiente para eu sair dele com a impressão de compreender agora muito melhor a área (e os temas que ela cobre) do que antes de lê-lo. Eu recomendaria para qualquer um curioso sobre metafísica (isto é, causalidade, ontologia, espaço e tempo, etc.).

[Lulu]

Metaphysics

[Brad · Rating 5 out of 5]

You won't regret reading this. I know that won't convince most people. But, for anyone thinking about reading this, please do.

[James · Rating 3 out of 5]

solid introduction. strength lies in Lowe's representation of concepts and theories, not so much in his own responses.

[Adam]

I read most of it for a class, but I'm finishing up the chapters we didn't cover.

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid.

[Walter · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great introductory book. Would also recommend Michael Loux.