Metaphysics: The Fundamentals

by Robert C. Koons

Metaphysics: The Fundamentals presents readers with a systematic, comprehensive introductory overview of modern analytic metaphysics.

Presents an accessible, up-to-date and broad-ranging survey of one of the most dynamic and often daunting sub-fields in contemporary philosophy Introduces readers to the seminal works of contemporary and historic philosophers, including Descartes, Leibniz, Russell, David Lewis, Alvin Plantinga, Kit Fine, Peter van Inwagen, John Hawthorne and many others Explores key questions while identifying important assumptions, axioms, and methodological principles Addresses topics in ontology, modality, causality, and universals; as well as issues surrounding material composition, persistence, space, and time

Genres: Philosophy, Metaphysics, Nonfiction

280 pages, Hardcover

First published October 27, 2014

About the author

Robert Charles Koons is American philosopher, noted for his contribution to metaphysics and philosophical logic. Koons has also advocated for academic freedom and courses on Western civilization. Koons is a national Senator of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, as well as a member of the executive committee of the Society of Christian Philosophers.

Reviews

[Lucas Murillo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent introduction text that covers the main topics in metaphysics. Also includes a chapter on truth-maker theory and powers (dispositions) which are not addressed in other introductory texts. Recommended for anyone wanting a good survey text but also helpful for students with little to no background in philosophy. Each chapter builds upon the previous, although it can be read selectively if one already has some background.

[Awaz Mebashar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Are there particular things, such as cabbages, kings, quarks, and galaxies? How many such things are there? Are there properties, the way things are? For example, is there a property of being green, circle, table, beautiful? Is truth itself a property? From the Big Bang to chemical bondings, does everything that changes have a cause? If yes, what is the causation? What is the essence of causation?
Is the whole nothing but some of its parts? Natural formations like the grains of sand, to rivers and lakes, mountains, and on to planets, stars, are any of these emergent wholes? The power of rice to nourish, the power of water to boil, the decay of certain atoms of radioactive isotopes, are these dispositions fundamental?
Why is time travel impossible? Are metaphysical questions nonsense and meaningless? Is it a reliable way to use reason to reach metaphysical conclusions? Is metaphysic unscientific?
These are some questions that the authors try to answer throughout the book. It starts out by giving a brief and clear introduction to the history of metaphysics with modern challenges and criticisms. The works of many philosophers are in the content of the book like (Aristotle, Leibniz, Kant, Sellars, Lewis, Armstrong, Inwagen, Descartes, Hume, Russel, Shoemaker) and so many others.
In philosophy as in other sciences, sometimes more than one theory fits into the data , and there are principles that are used to know which one is more useful; so Koons and Pickavance use Ockham’s Razor for comparing to know which theories will make the best account. The last chapter includes main arguments in defense of and against Metaphysics. But in the end, they reached their main goal which was to convey that metaphysics is inevitable. One of the weak points of the book is that its chapters are related, which makes it less useful since one can not read selected chapters without background. There are also minor issues with the book such as the misrepresentation of Nietzsche's doctrine of eternal return as a metaphysical theory for the possibility of ruling out classical bundle theory, which is actually a thought experiment. However one of the good points is there were terms used in the book like (Neo-Humeism, Powerism..etc.) that made it more simple and understandable for categorization of different arguments.
I read this book as an introduction to metaphysics, it is easy to understand even though some arguments are technical and detailed but their concept was still clear. The most enjoyable chapters for me were about Properties and Time, which greatly interested me personally.

[Derek Perumean · Rating 2 out of 5]

I wish I could give half stars. This book is about 2 1/2 stars. Thank God it is short. For real torture, to your mind and wallet, their work "Atlas of Reality" would be the way to go. My friend who attends Biola was forced to read this for a class. Pity the entire class. If you can't handle higher level science classes, but still want to get your degree in something this book is for you! A glossary would have helped since the authors' explanations leave much to be desired. I read somewhere that German intellectuals will write in a more difficult style if the subject matter itself is difficult in order to make you really think and grapple with the subject. I think these guys wrote in a difficult manner to let you know they have Ph. Ds and you don't. I guess it helps justify the price of their books. For anyone who doesn't view philosophy as the handmaid of linguistics or science, and you made your saving throw against Lewis' spell of ontological confusion, you'll want to try real philosophy like the older scholastic works by Peter Coffey, John McCormick or R.P. Phillips. Also, D.Q. McInerny's book would be a great start. I gave a copy to my friend who showed it to a female classmate who uttered "why didn't we read this book instead?!" Amen, sister!

[Felicity · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read as part of a reading challenge. The prompt was "Read a book on a subject you know nothing about" and this was one of my sister's old text books, it was short, and I knew nothing about metaphysics. Sadly, I still know nothing about metaphysics (other than what I found during a quick google search) so I'm rating 3 stars as I don't know if the book just didn't explain it very well or if the entire concept is too abstract for me. It may have helped if the book went a little more into the history of some of the theories or had a glossary as a lot of times there would just be a name of a philosopher or term thrown in that I was completely unfamiliar with but was expected to know. Overall I think that while it was marketed as a beginner's introduction on the back cover it was clearly meant for someone already familiar with the subject of metaphysics and philosophy as a whole.

[Ryan Garrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

While concise, this is an incredibly dense book - which of course is to be expected given the topic. It’s is well thought out and laid out. I also generally agreed with many of their conclusions regarding preferred theories. At times, it may have been better with a little less concision and a slower approach to these complicated topics given this is an introductory book. I found various discussions interesting and well drawn, though I often wish there were more “real world” examples given at times in order to clarify theories being examined. When examples were given, some were superb and others were a bit jargon-heavy (for an introduction). All of that said, metaphysics is simply a complicated intellectual endeavor, and at least from my limited experience, any book trying to cover the general scope will feel like drinking from a fire hose.

[Micah Larussa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Covers basically every modern problem in metaphysics, but I wished it was a bit more historical. The way the book is organized, the schools of thought on a topic keep breaking down into more and more specific theories, which gets very confusing after a while. Well written, balanced in its criticism. The chapter on the passage of time was particularly clear. I never took metaphysics in college so this book was a valuable supplement.

[Nathan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Self-inflicted brain torture. One of the few books I almost put down. This is not a good introduction to Metaphysics, even for an undergraduate philosophy student. The chapters on modality, time, and composition were its saving grace. I would highly recommend Peter Van Inwagen's "Metaphysics" instead.

[Elias · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book gives a solid overview of the main topics in metaphysics and includes lots of contemporary thinkers and ideas. It’s a great resource if you’re already interested in the subject. But for beginners, the writing can be tough, dense wording and complex explanations make it hard to follow at times. It’s a strong intro, just not an easy one

[Nicholas Danne · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book largely inscrutable and not for beginners, and I don't think that all of the arguments work. See my critical review in the journal, Metaphysica: https://ndanne.files.wordpress.com/20...

[Sarieh Al-Tabaa · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book explains many philosophical theories, shows how they interact with each other and concludes by classifying them into packages, it's a very dense book but otherwise it's good as an introduction but needs to be more elaborate.

[Sooho Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an advanced book -- at least, for a philosophy-beginner like me, this was a hard read.
On that note, I don't have much else to compare this to, so three stars.

[Lulu]

Metaphysics

[Katsura · Rating 1 out of 5]

اجرب كتاب قريتو في حياتي يا رجل

[Federico Bondi · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had initially rated this book 3/5 but I have then lowered the rating to 2/5.
These are the main reasons:
1)the authors often use names that, I presume, are non-standard since it is very difficult to find anything online about them(e.g. nomism, modular trope relational ontology...);
2)the authors do not put a bibliography at the end of the chapters suggesting books and papers on the subject(that are sometimes only quoted in line) so that it is difficult to know how to go on after this book;
3)though it is an introductory book, it sometimes skip some steps only quoting things that may need some more development;
4)sometimes there are brute banalization of some subjects, too brute even for an introductory text(e.g. Ramsey's deflationary account of truth in the second chapter, Aristotle's account of causes in the third one...).