The Presocratics

by Edward Hussey

minor shelf wear only very slight wear and chipping to wrapper

Genres: Philosophy, Classics, History, Nonfiction

168 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1973

Reviews

[Tom]

Something between a survey and a detailed study, though closer to the former, this book made for some nice reading during a recent camping trip. It offers some tantalizing glimpses into not only the proto-science/philosophy of the Presocratics itself but also the ongoing debates (in 1972- though how much could change with this subject, really?) about just what it was that these guys were talking about. The best chapters were those discussing Heraclitus and Parmenides, most likely a reflection of how much in the way of fragments from their work exist. Whatever the case, both of these chapters were able to convey a subtlety of thought belonging to these thinkers that was not apparent in the summary treatments I've read by Copleston and Russell. And every chapter contained clear reminders of how non-obvious are the notions about reality taken for granted since Plato. Recommended for anyone with an interest in the history of thought.

[Connor Kosnik]

Interesting selection of what little reliable evidence exists of Presocratic thought. This book was very interesting at not only drawing out the important figures of Presocratic thought and their contributions but also contrasting their work, in order to establish the gaps in theoretical explanations that were left regarding subjects such as cosmogony, cosmology, and others. Much of the intellectual thought of this time, from what can be analyzed, arguably laid groundwork for significant developments within most scientific and philosophical fields during latter parts of human history. This book was a joy to read and helped expand my understanding of philosophy as a whole.

[Андрій Резніченко]

Філіп Дік згадує цю книжку у «Валісі», активно цитує і захоплюється автором. Найхимерніша книжкова рекомендація, яку я отримував! Звісно, вирішив перевірити, чи Філіп Дік не вигадує часом нічого, як, скажімо, Борхес. Але ні, книжка справжня і автор справжній. І не дивно, що Дік так захоплювався Едвардом Хассі – і зробив йому гарну рекламу – адже стиль подачі простий, не спрощений і зберігає в собі вогонь цікавості. Хоча кардинально нового про досократиків не дізнався, однак освіжив знання і чіткіше став розуміти, наприклад, як працює система Емпедокла, а також краще став уявляти перехід від Мінойської цивілізації до класичної Греції, а також роль досократиків при цьому. Цікаво також подивитися на творчість пізнього Філіпа Діка крізь призму цієї книжки, бо в пізніх оповіданнях американського письменника тема досократиків виринає на поверхню доволі добре.

[Jack]

A bit of a slog to read despite the small page count, largely due to the unfortunate fact that first-hand accounts of Pre-Socratic thought are lacking, and thus Hussey chooses mostly to speak only on what is certain, which is very little, and dry.
Ultimately interesting to read the progression of Western thought, but I don't feel as if I've come out of reading it with my knowledge greatly enhanced.

[Canavan]

✭✭✭

[Anna]

read for *uni* for cl2003
very useful text for introductions to the cultural context of the presocratics (which obviously varies, but it's interesting to note how the emergence of philosophy in those city-states is probably to do with the advent of tyrannies and written law after centuries of unquestioned monarchical rule), and also to parmenides and xenophanes. quite sparse on empedocles, but hey, i forgive hussey - he's confusing as hell.

[Dvdlynch]

A well-rounded and clear overview of the subject. I found the chapter on Heraclitus to be particularly fine.

[John Ellis]

For anyone interested in studying the Presocratics, I would recommend John Burnet's EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY and Frederick Copelston's A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY: VOLUME I over Edward Hussey's book.