What do you think?
Rate this book
Problems from Philosophy
Problems from Philosophy is an introduction to philosophy which is organized around the great philosophical problems—the existence of God, the nature of the mind, human freedom, the limits of knowledge, and the truth about ethics. It begins by reflecting on the life of the first great philosopher, Socrates. Then it takes up the fundamental question of whether God exists. Next comes a discussion of death and the soul, which leads to a chapter about persons. The later chapters of the book are about whether objective knowledge is possible in science and ethics. Each chapter is self-contained and may be read independently of the others.Problems from Philosophy represents the final work of author and philosopher James Rachels. In it, he brings the same liveliness and clarity to the introduction of philosophy that he brings to his best-selling ethics text, The Elements of Moral Philosophy. The second and third edition have been revised by Rachels' son Stuart, who carefully has carefully refined his father's work to further strengthen its clarity and accessibility.
Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2004
20 people are currently reading
255 people want to read
About the author
James Rachels
60 books34 followersJames Rachels, the distinguished American moral philosopher, was born in Columbus, Georgia, and graduated from nearby Mercer University in 1962. He received his Ph.D. in 1967 from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, studying under Professors W. D. Falk and E. M. Adams. He taught at the University of Richmond, New York University, the University of Miami, Duke University, and the University of Alabama at Birmingham, where he spent the last twenty-six years of his career. 1971 saw the publication of his groundbreaking anthology Moral Problems, which helped ignite the movement from teaching metaethics in American colleges to teaching concrete practical issues. Moral Problems sold 100,000 copies over three editions. In 1975, Rachels wrote "Active and Passive Euthanasia," arguing that the distinction so important in the law between killing and letting die has no rational basis. Originally appearing in the New England Journal of Medicine, this essay has been reprinted 300 times and is a staple of undergraduate education. The End of Life (1986) broadened and deepened these ideas. Created from Animals (1990) argued that a Darwinian world-view has widespread philosophical implications, including drastic implications for our treatment of nonhuman animals. Can Ethics Provide Answers? (1997) was Rachels' first collection of papers; The Legacy of Socrates (2007) was his second. Rachels' textbook, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, is currently the best-selling book in philosophy. Shortly before being diagnosed with cancer, Rachels finished Problems from Philosophy, an introduction to his subject, published posthumously.
Over his career, Rachels wrote 6 books and 86 essays, edited 7 books and gave about 275 professional lectures. His work has been translated into Dutch, Korean, Norwegian, Italian, Japanese, Indonesian, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, and Serbo-Croatian. He is widely admired as a stylist; his essays and books are remarkably free of jargon and clutter. A major theme in his work is that reason can resolve difficult moral issues. He has argued for moral vegetarianism and animal rights, for affirmative action (including quotas), for the humanitarian use of euthanasia, and for the idea that parents owe as much moral consideration to other people's children as to their own.
Over his career, Rachels wrote 6 books and 86 essays, edited 7 books and gave about 275 professional lectures. His work has been translated into Dutch, Korean, Norwegian, Italian, Japanese, Indonesian, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, and Serbo-Croatian. He is widely admired as a stylist; his essays and books are remarkably free of jargon and clutter. A major theme in his work is that reason can resolve difficult moral issues. He has argued for moral vegetarianism and animal rights, for affirmative action (including quotas), for the humanitarian use of euthanasia, and for the idea that parents owe as much moral consideration to other people's children as to their own.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
March 6, 2017
So after a long break, I am back on GR. Feels good :)
Problems from Philosophy is a concise work on some of the pressing issues in philosophy. As an introduction, this book does its job rather well. The language is not too academic, and it reads pretty quickly, but covers each topic in good depth. The appendix has a nice section on logic and arguments as well.
The topics covered include the existence of God, the nature of the mind, determinism, free-will, compatibilsm, the limits of knowledge, and ethics. It begins by reflecting on the life of the first great philosopher, Socrates. Then it takes up the fundamental question of whether God exists. Next comes a discussion of death and the soul, which leads to a chapter about persons. The later chapters of the book are about whether objective knowledge is possible in science and ethics.
Despite his great efforts in compressing complicated subjects into digestible chunks, his bias on many of the subjects stands out. Especially in the chapters dealing with ethics, he blatantly leaves out deontological approaches on morality and extensively expounds on Utilitarian morality.
Problems from Philosophy is a concise work on some of the pressing issues in philosophy. As an introduction, this book does its job rather well. The language is not too academic, and it reads pretty quickly, but covers each topic in good depth. The appendix has a nice section on logic and arguments as well.
The topics covered include the existence of God, the nature of the mind, determinism, free-will, compatibilsm, the limits of knowledge, and ethics. It begins by reflecting on the life of the first great philosopher, Socrates. Then it takes up the fundamental question of whether God exists. Next comes a discussion of death and the soul, which leads to a chapter about persons. The later chapters of the book are about whether objective knowledge is possible in science and ethics.
Despite his great efforts in compressing complicated subjects into digestible chunks, his bias on many of the subjects stands out. Especially in the chapters dealing with ethics, he blatantly leaves out deontological approaches on morality and extensively expounds on Utilitarian morality.
April 7, 2019
This book is a terrible introduction to philosophy. It has many bad arguments and misrepresents some philosophers viewpoints for the sake of simplicity.
July 24, 2022
A very short and concise introductory book on philosophy. Rachels did a good job of breaking down complex ideas and communicating them in a very short amount of time. He does it so quickly and so concisely one could complain about it but a student reading this in a class will appreciate his brevity.
At first I thought he was an intellectual trying to defend faith but at the end I am of the opinion he is an intellectual trying to get religious people to think. The fact that it's hard to tell means he did a good job in writing either way.
One problem I have is in the course of a chapter he would reveal traditional ideas obsolete and then at the end of the chapter he would have a positive end note where he would say it's all ok in the end. In almost every case this positive end note seemed overly shallow and unfulfilling. For example on free will he concluded that all the evidence seems to point (in his opinion) to people not having free will but he concluded that it's ok we can keep acting as if they do because we don't like it when people murder each other. Not the expert here but if you say people lack free will you can't hold them accountable because they are victims of their genes and environment.
That said, for what it was, it was a solid read and I don't expect it to solve complex issues which no one has successfully solved.
One of my more interesting takeaways was clarification on the ontological argument. The idea that God is a perfect being and as a perfect being he must exist or else he wouldn't be perfect.
The idea that ethics is not objective like science but it is objective in the way that math is.
The author makes an interesting claim that the New Testament does not ever state we have an immortal soul and only says that Christ promises to resurrect us in the last day.
At first I thought he was an intellectual trying to defend faith but at the end I am of the opinion he is an intellectual trying to get religious people to think. The fact that it's hard to tell means he did a good job in writing either way.
One problem I have is in the course of a chapter he would reveal traditional ideas obsolete and then at the end of the chapter he would have a positive end note where he would say it's all ok in the end. In almost every case this positive end note seemed overly shallow and unfulfilling. For example on free will he concluded that all the evidence seems to point (in his opinion) to people not having free will but he concluded that it's ok we can keep acting as if they do because we don't like it when people murder each other. Not the expert here but if you say people lack free will you can't hold them accountable because they are victims of their genes and environment.
That said, for what it was, it was a solid read and I don't expect it to solve complex issues which no one has successfully solved.
One of my more interesting takeaways was clarification on the ontological argument. The idea that God is a perfect being and as a perfect being he must exist or else he wouldn't be perfect.
The idea that ethics is not objective like science but it is objective in the way that math is.
The author makes an interesting claim that the New Testament does not ever state we have an immortal soul and only says that Christ promises to resurrect us in the last day.
November 25, 2022
Two young and wealthy (with chauffeurs and all) brats, mentally and physically healthy, deliberately murdered a 14 y.o. boy after a preliminary 7 month planning and search of a victim. They then disfigured the face and genitals with acid, hid the body, and requested ransom from the family to conceal the fact of murder. The senseless act was committed for no other reason than to prove themselves they are clever and won't be ever caught, a side project of sorts.
But you see, James Rachels argues, science has long established it wasn't the brats' fault after all. For all we know, it could as well be you pouring acid over kid's genitals. The murderers are real victims, we learn, they couldn't help it. In fact, given the initial data and all the physical laws an external observer could predict their act long before the murderers' birth. If we can't make such predictions it's only because we lack the data.
Now, this position, to justification of which a good part of the book is devoted, is not only vicious, it's factually wrong even for a world of simple deterministic automatons (see Chaos Theory). And yet this is a second introductory philosophy book (Stephen Law's one being the first) in a row I meet that claims otherwise. It must be very cozy in the 19th century.
But you see, James Rachels argues, science has long established it wasn't the brats' fault after all. For all we know, it could as well be you pouring acid over kid's genitals. The murderers are real victims, we learn, they couldn't help it. In fact, given the initial data and all the physical laws an external observer could predict their act long before the murderers' birth. If we can't make such predictions it's only because we lack the data.
Now, this position, to justification of which a good part of the book is devoted, is not only vicious, it's factually wrong even for a world of simple deterministic automatons (see Chaos Theory). And yet this is a second introductory philosophy book (Stephen Law's one being the first) in a row I meet that claims otherwise. It must be very cozy in the 19th century.
May 24, 2019
A very interesting and enlightening book.
December 16, 2019
This book definitely gave me a lot to think about, although it was for my Philosophy class I really enjoyed it.
Read
July 28, 2022read it for a philosophy course but found it very thought-provoking and it completely changed my views on multiple subjects! a great introduction to philosophy for beginners
August 18, 2010
An excellent introduction to philosophy for the young adult and adult independent learner. The philosophical problems are presented succinctly and with pertinent information from history, politics, and cultural studies. The book is deceptively thin, and took me much longer to read than I had anticipated due to the density of the material.
The format of the book doesn't leave much to the readers imagination, however. Rachels presents the problem, presents the varying arguments, and then presents his commentary. This makes it difficult for the reader to form his or her own opinions before reading on. This is obviously a minor problem, however.
The book also includes an appendix on informal logic (How to Evaluate Arguments) that would prove indispensable to the philosophical newcomer looking to sift through seemingly sound arguments on either side of an issue. It would prove quite informative to just about anyone looking to understand why people are often tricked by the rhetorical tricks of politicians and other public figures.
The format of the book doesn't leave much to the readers imagination, however. Rachels presents the problem, presents the varying arguments, and then presents his commentary. This makes it difficult for the reader to form his or her own opinions before reading on. This is obviously a minor problem, however.
The book also includes an appendix on informal logic (How to Evaluate Arguments) that would prove indispensable to the philosophical newcomer looking to sift through seemingly sound arguments on either side of an issue. It would prove quite informative to just about anyone looking to understand why people are often tricked by the rhetorical tricks of politicians and other public figures.
August 10, 2016
I can't believe that my estimation is correct but Rachels seemed to have almost a supernatural ability to summarize religious philosophical ideas without condescension even as he switched to the rebutting secular philosophical ideas. I kept wondering, "Wait, is this guy a full-fledged Christian?" and then i'd say, "Wait, is this guy completely secular?" For a brief intro to philosophy such as this one, i doubt you'll find a more balanced or objective author.
By the way, i would bet that he was a nonbeliever. Whatever that means.
By the way, i would bet that he was a nonbeliever. Whatever that means.
May 17, 2015
This book works well as an introduction to the major philosophical problems and theories, though the way it was written makes the author's own opinions obvious. Some of the arguments were weak, but it's forgivable since the intention was to skim through the subjects. The writing style is clear and fun.
August 4, 2007
A very short, simple survey book with good primary source docs online. It'd be nice if the primary source docs were a little longer, annotated, and in a reader, but I think this will work well enough.
RIP Mr. Rachels.
--Neil
RIP Mr. Rachels.
--Neil
May 21, 2014
There were a lot of interesting concepts but I felt that the author didn't offer a balanced view. There were many times he skimped on the opposing view, and dismissed it as inferior.
October 22, 2015
Excellent primer for children. Not intended for adult philosophy students. Asks questions I asked when I was getting stoned in high school.
March 18, 2016
This is the first philosophy book I've ever read. I found it very interesting and well-written. But I thought it had a somewhat biased presentation.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews