200 Words to Help You Talk About Philosophy

by Anja Steinbauer

Have you have ever felt at a disadvantage when joining in a conversation on a subject that you aren't confident about? If yes, this new book series is for you. Each book features definitions of two hundred words frequently used to describe and discuss a smart subject.

200 Words to Help You Talk About Philosophy is designed to demystify jargon-based philosophic language and make you at ease holding a conversation on the topic. Philosophy can be baffling, as well as fascinating, to the best of us. Let Anja Steinbauer guide you through doubt, dialectic, Dao, and much more. The book is written with digestible text enabling a quick and easy understanding of various topics while broadening your philosophical vocabulary.

200 Words to Help You Talk About Philosophy is one of two new titles beginning a series of smart subjects, also including art, psychology, and music.

Genres: Philosophy, Reference

128 pages, Hardcover

First published November 17, 2020

Reviews

[Sharondblk · Rating 1 out of 5]

I read (or attempted to read) 200 Words to Help You talk About - Philosophy. It is impossible to read the definition of 200 words and actually learn anything. There is no narrative, no link between the individual words - it's literally like reading a dictionary. Except that the entries vary from reading like they were written by a year ten student trying very hard, to someone just grabbing the first paragraph they found on Google. Lots of the definitions seem to start with things like "it's hard to identify" or "there is lots of disagreement" or one philosophers opinion. Spout that that, and someone who who actually knows something about the topic would take you down in a conversation, or at best, look at you quizzically, shake their head slightly and ignore you.

Knowing one isolated fact would not help me participate or even understand a conversation. I understand the concept of this book, but it doesn't work when executed like this.

Thanks to NetGalley for the free copy in exchange for this painfully honest review.

[Elisah · Rating 4 out of 5]

interesting. comes in handy when your friends study philosophy and you don’t want to feel stupid

[Radwa · Rating 2 out of 5]

English Review Below.

كنت آمل أن يمدني هذا الكتاب بفهم وتعريفات للكثير من الكلمات والمصطلحات الفلسفية، ولكن في النهاية وجدتني أكثر حيرة بعد قراءة تعريف كل كلمة أكثر مما كنت قبل قراءته. يركز الكتاب كثير على اقتباس ما قاله فلاسفة مختلفون عن مصطلح بعينه، بدلا من شرح المصطلح، فنجد أننا في النهاية لم نفهم أغلب المصطلحات فعلا. لا أرشحه للمبتدئين في الفلسفة الذين يودون فعلا البدء بخوض الفلسفة وفهم مصطلحاتها وتعبيراتها.

I had high hopes for this book, to be a good introduction to a lot of philosophic words and concepts, but ended up being a collection of concepts that you don't end up really understanding in the end. I found myself more puzzled after reading a definition than I was before reading it. It's certainly not for beginners in philosophy, and it heavily depends on quoting what others said about said concept, instead of actually explaining it.

I thank Netgalley for the digital ARC

[Mary Callaghan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author of this erudite and highly enjoyable little book has written a short piece, or longish paragraph, on each of 200 key words chosen from across philosophy. Each takes up about half a page and they are organised into chapters by topic, e.g. “Knowledge and Ignorance” and “Individuals and Society”. Naturally, being so brief, none of the individual pieces can be a comprehensive guide to all aspects of the philosophical term with which it deals, and clearly this book isn’t intended to be a textbook. However, many of the pieces are absolute gems and each of them gives the reader something memorable to carry away to help understand and participate in discussions about philosophy. In other words, the book provides exactly what it says on the cover. I warmly recommend it.

I found some of the other reviews here rather puzzling. Why review something as if it were a novel or a textbook when it makes no claim to be one? It is as though I reviewed Russell’s History of Western Philosophy (for example) on these lines: “Although it says in big letters on the front that it’s a history of philosophy, I have decided to review it here as if it were a cream cake. As such, it is a disappointment. It was difficult to cut it up and when I put it in my mouth it tasted like paper. Yuck! One star.”

[Peter Geyer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I like to philosophise, although I'm not a philosopher. These are two different things, something C.G. Jung understood, if not a Jungian or two.

My library has several books on philosophy, or by philosophers, even subscribing to the magazine Philosophy Now, an eclectic read where the jargon can defeat me at times.

This book is intended to help people like me, and others, by presenting some words used in philosophy (elsewhere, too) with a paragraph of explanation which might give origins, anecdotes or examples, even ask a question to make you think, or muse a bit.

Anja Steinbauer is associated with Philosophy Now, where I first heard of the book: a slim text with a robust cover (I accidentally tested that out) and pages with a pinkish hue throughout. There are 4 words to two pages, mostly two on each page, with an occasional overlap. This has the advantage of enabling you to look at the relevant paragraph and reflect on it, without having to turn over pages.

I read this from start to finish, over a few days and found it predominantly enjoyable. The author's style is easy and open, as though she might be sitting across a table, or leading a seminar. In many respects, it's a volume that you would have on your shelves to dip into rather than a complete read, and that was really what I bought it for.

[Vanessa · Rating 5 out of 5]

I liked that each concept presented in this book was no more than a paragraph. Though I read each one, the bite size pieces gave me a chance to decide what concepts were of greater interest to me and to further explore those from outside sources. I also like that it’s presented in categories such as knowledge, Identity, thought, language etc…

To provide a glimpse:
-It will have generic terms such as “Nothing”, give an interesting viewpoint of the concept and then refer to a philosopher that has something to say about that topic such as the philosopher Zhuangzi’s quote— “Cut doors and windows from the walls of a house; but ultimately use of the house will depend on that part where nothing exists.”

-It also includes more concrete philosophy terms such Skepticism and presents you a quick explanation/history like Pyrrho being the original and most extreme sceptic etc.

-Then there’s new terms I didn’t know like “Boo-Hurrah” which is a reference to Emotivism—moral judgements are nothing but expressions of feelings of approval or disapproval.

The index is helpful to refer back to terms I want to reread to gain better understanding and refresh my memory.

Great option for those that like to pick up a book and read a few pages and do so the following day. I only read 1-2 pages a day, perfect for getting a bit of insight while continuing with my normal reads.

[Marcel · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s not meant to be a dictionary or a textbook, it’s supposed to make you think. A reading experience that is both pleasurable and informative!

[Rory Fox · Rating 3 out of 5]

At under 130 pages this is 200 paragraphs, each providing a thought about a philosophical word. Each word was usually accompanied by an insight from a named philosopher with an added reflection by the author.

The 200 concepts (Words) are not linked, so the book reads more like a dictionary of ideas, rather than a text book. The extracts are like discussion pieces, or ‘thunks’ for further reflection. I enjoyed the read and found the entries thoughtful. The book is probably best appreciated in extracts, rather than as a single continuous read.

I thought that the range of philosophical cultures was a little narrow. The book mainly cites western thinkers, with occasional Chinese and Buddhist influences. It was disappointing that there was no inclusion of important Islamic philosophers like Al Farabi, Al Ghazali, Ibn Rushd, Ibn Sina (etc). Their views range so widely that they could easily have been accommodated into the sections in the book. For example Al Ghazali’s theory of occasionalism could have been contrasted with modern ideas of causation, especially as it is similar to the Humean view cited in the book.

I also thought that the philosophical eras were a little narrow. The author includes ancient thinkers like Plato and then jumps to the Enlightenment and modern era thinkers like Sartre and Heidegger. There was a reference to Machiavelli (under ‘power’) and Aquinas (under Just War) but otherwise there was no citation or acknowledgement of the enormous debt that modern philosophy owes to medieval thinkers. That was disappointing as there are many interesting philosophers and anecdotes which could have been included. For example, Jean Buridan’s 14th Century example of a donkey (Buridan’s Ass) illustrates issues to do with free will. There could have been an entry on Barbara Celerant, as generations of medieval logicians had to learn the acronym in order to understand syllogisms. (Etc).

All things considered I enjoyed the book, but I found its omissions a little narrowing and limiting.

I would like to thank the publishers for giving me access to a free digital version of the text for purposes of review.