Czy roboty czują ból?

by Peter Cave

Nie musisz znać filozofii, by poznać moc filozoficznego zdziwienia.

W tej pełnej myślowych paradoksów książce Peter Cave przedstawia 33 klasyczne i mniej znane filozoficzne problemy w sposób, który zmusi do zadumy nawet najmocniej stąpających po ziemi. Obywając się bez „izmów” i litanii nazwisk, za to z wykorzystaniem fantazji i dużej dawki humoru, autor prowadzi czytelnika od pozornie prostych sytuacji do samego sedna problemów, nad którymi od lat głowią się filozofowie. Czytelnik z reguły sam musi odnaleźć wyjście z myślowego labiryntu, w czym pomocna mu będzie opisowa bibliografia zawarta na końcu.

Lekko napisana, lecz z pewnością nie trywialna, książka przeznaczona jest dla każdego, kto zastanawia się nad światem – bez względu na wiek. Do ubocznych efektów lektury należy nieodparte poczucie zdziwienia rzeczywistością, a w skrajnych przypadkach – chęć zostania filozofem.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Science, Law

216 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2010

About the author

Peter Cave lectures in philosophy for The Open University and New York University (London). He frequently contributes to philosophy magazines and journals, lectures around the world, and has scripted and presented philosophy programmes for the BBC. He is the author of eight books on philosophy, including Humanism: A Beginner’s Guide and the bestselling Can a Robot be Human?: 33 Perplexing Philosophy Puzzles.

Reviews

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

With 33 chapters squeezed into fewer than 200 pages, Peter Cave's absorbing journey into philosophy very much keeps the emphasis on brevity and fun, but also serves as a genuinely interesting primer for anyone who has ever been fascinated by those ethical dilemmas and logical paradoxes that life intermittently throws up. Written with wit and knowledge, you'll find that the chapters fly by. Clearly this isn't some philosophy heavyweight but as an introduction, it's accessible, fun and achieves what it sets out to do.

[Cagne · Rating 1 out of 5]

Shortly after I started this, somebody asked me "So, can a robot be human?". It took a lot to get to chapter/puzzle 29 where this is discussed, and now I have no real answer to that question other than some matrix stuff.

I'm either too stupid (good chance you will be too) to appreciate how each short "puzzle" is so interesting or I lack the background in philosophy to get all the faces of the die or to care about them. At the end of the book there is a list of suggested readings for each puzzle, so they way I make sense of reading this is as a wide selection of possible topics you might be interested in with instructions to further investigate whatever puzzle catches your fascination.

I tried to read it as suggested by the author, one or two puzzles a day, it became soon one a week in between, until I sped up to get rid of the book.

[Yıldız · Rating 4 out of 5]

felsefeye ilgisi olanlar için kısa, anlaşılır ve eğlenceli bir kitap. hemen okudum bitti diyemem, arka arkaya okunmuyor. günde 1-2 konu okuyup zamana yayarak okunası.

[Matthew D · Rating 3 out of 5]

like a lovely introduction. it was my fault for having expectations but if this is like more than a passing interest to you, you've probably spent time with these thoughts already

[Liam O'Leary · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'd highly recommend this an introduction to 'what philosophy is' for teenagers or laypeople.
I read this well before my university and job interviews and I think it steered me towards answering those 'unanswerable but we want to see how your approach' questions.

Would make a good present for people who 'think too much', 'think abstractly', 'like talking about their dreams or shower thoughts'.

It makes problematic ethical and epistemological situations easy to understand, visualize, read and enjoy. The reasons I'm not giving this 5*s is that the questions could have been ordered so as to pertain to similar fields of philosophy for ease of memory, and that no formal references or recommendations were made for further reading for avid readers.

[Tomek Kobyliński · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ale cringe. Zagadki jak zagadki. Ale opowiedziane przez takiego najbardziej oblesnego wujka z takimi wujowatymi alzujami seksualnymi. Ja to jakis strasznie subtelny nie jestem, ani w ogole, ale się na pawia co chwila zbierało. Nie wiem czemu w ogole to przeczytałem. Chyba nienawidzę siebie.

[Anthony · Rating 1 out of 5]

Lots of interesting ideas, but not gone into very deeply.

[Georgie · Rating 2 out of 5]

A very, very basic introduction to some philosophical problems.

[Nick Kinsella · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointing. Introduces concepts without following through on any of them.

[Jessada Karnjana · Rating 4 out of 5]

33 คำถามนี้เรียกว่าเป็น perplexing philosophy puzzles ไม่มีใครกล้าฟันธงลงไปว่าคำตอบนี้ถูกหรือผิด เช่น ฆ่าคน 1 คน เพื่อช่วยเหลือคนอื่น ๆ โดยที่คนที่ถูกฆ่าก็ไม่มีความผิดอะไร แบบนี้ถือว่ามีคุณธรรมมั้ย ถ้าไม่ฆ่า ไอ้คนอื่น ๆ ที่ไม่ได้รับความช่วยเหลือก็อาจจะตาย, ทำไมคนเราจึงมีความรู้สึก รัก เกลียด กลัว ชิงชัง รู้สึกอินกับวรรณกรรม กับหนัง กับ fictional ต่าง ๆ (ทั้ง ๆ ที่รู้ว่ามันไม่จริง), ทำไมเราจึงเลือกที่จะเชื่อว่า พระเจ้าที่ยิ่งใหญ่ พระเจ้าที่สร้างเอกภพนั้นเป็นพระเจ้าที่ดีงาม แทนที่จะเป็นพระเจ้าซึ่งชั่วร้าย - คำถามเดียวกับการถามว่าความดีมีอยู่ ดำรงอยู่ได้อย่างไร), ประเด็นปัญหาเกี่ยวกับค่าอนันต์ ซึ่งดูเหมือนมีคำตอบทางคณิตศาสตร์ ตัวอย่างยอดฮิตคืออะคิลิสกับเต่า, ถ้าฆ่าคนเป็นความผิดแล้ว การสร้างคนหรือให้กำเนิดคน ทำไมไม่เป็นความผิดไปด้วย ... เหล่านี้แหละ 33 คำถาม อ่านไปก็ไม่พบคำตอบหรอก แต่จุดเด่นของมันคือการยั่วยวนให้คุณใช้ความคิด

[Peter · Rating 3 out of 5]

When I first picked up this book I thought it was going to be a 5*. But in the end it irritated me so much that I gave up after 5 chapters. So why a 3* and not something lower: because I am prepared to give it the benefit of the doubt that it discusses some interesting philosophical (mostly moral) questions in a light-hearted way – I just didn't like the flippant style. I don't know much about philosophy but I found some of the arguments rather simplistic also, but that could just have been the style outweighing the substance.
Shame really.

[Colby · Rating 2 out of 5]

Once were warriors.

[Mafalda Vale · Rating 2 out of 5]

meh

[Jothi · Rating 1 out of 5]

Tegenvaller

[dabtsuki · Rating 3 out of 5]

would be a decent introduction to some philosophical questions for a young teenager, but the humour is a bit too cringe even for that demographic

[The_J · Rating 3 out of 5]

not as successful in presenting some of the questions as one would have liked, but not a waste of time

[Sayantan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Short and fun to read. Not for those looking to plumb great depths but a good buffet of food-for-thought for aspiring armchair philosophers. The chapters are small, peppered with witty quips yet covering many moral quandaries and logical singularities.

Since the chapters are so short and fun, one may be tempted to rush through the book at one go, but its better to chew one chapter at a time and give it some time to sink in before moving on to the next.

Few of the chapters though might feel repetitive, harping on a point presented in some earlier, few might feel trivial, obvious and few others too abstruse, but still, very entertaining. Recommended for those trying to get a peek into the otherwise overwhelming world of philosophy, or just to have fun while having something to ponder over.

[Jak · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not overly impressed by the book. I think that’s more to do with how I found the construction of philosophical arguments rather than any particular criticism of Cave’s abilities.

To expand on that, it was basically a load of old film-flam and verbal slight of hand ignoring some convenient physical realities. Probably the best example of this is the race between Mr T (the tortoise) and Achilles. Cave showed that Mr T could never be beaten in a race with Achilles, which I’m sure you’ll agree is a neat trick.

However, despite never having studied philosophy, even I could knock that argument into a cocked hat.

There were other more challenging puzzles and quite a few were thought provoking if constructed in a platform of verbal artistry rather than imperial evidence.

[Krzysztof · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bezbolesne wprowadzenie do zróżnicowanej gamy filozoficznych zagadnień; kilkustronicowe szkice problemów pozwalają szybko zdecydować, czy chcemy zastanowić się nad czymś dalej we własnym zakresie, czy interesuje nas coś innego. Czasem ta lakoniczność nieco przeszkadza, bo ciężko nieraz dostrzec związki przyczynowo-skutkowe między kolejnymi zdaniami i propozycjami ujęcia problemu, ale też dzięki temu podczas lektury nie grozi nam nuda. Warto zwrócić uwagę na końcowe przypisy, które wzbogacają każdy rozdział o odnośniki do najważniejszych rozpraw filozoficznych na dany temat; aż chciałoby się to wszystko przestudiować.

[Nicole Miles · Rating 3 out of 5]

A light read and fun introduction to philosophical puzzles in a "choose your own adventure" style where the end of chapter gives you to two or three options of other related* chapters to read next.

*The follow-on chapters are related to the previous one you read in different ways. So, for example, if one chapter dealt with multiple dimensions, existentialism and ethics, you would pick the next chapter you want to read based on whichever of those topics interested you most about what you just read (eventually you get around to all the chapters in the book anyway though.

[Maddyy Kendrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this book was actually quite enjoyable, and the only criticism I might have for it is that for people who don't particularly care about the religious side o things, it's really hard to actually be interested in the it, because it just doesn't engage your interests.
The rest of the book however was very good, it was thought provoking, and Cave's lightness of touch makes it all the more enjoyable.

[Nick · Rating 3 out of 5]

In a very similar vein to The pig that wants to be eaten by J Baggini. Separate chapters that make you think about the way you think about things, and often you may end up questioning what you really do believe and whether it is consistent. Not as detailed as Justice by Sandell (which is excellent), but a good book to dip into and read a chapter every now and then, as opposed to reading straight through.

[Jose · Rating 3 out of 5]

Short chapters describing puzzles, it's not a "serious" philosophy book. Rather it's an entertaining book meant for people to get interested in philosophy. Not bad, just a tad trivial, the writing style could be better but it could be worse too.

[Sally · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very light read as an introduction to philosophy via simple, but occasionally thought-provoking, ideas. The author's own prejudices show through, but some good conversation starters nonetheless (even if they are the sort of conversations one might have in the pub).

[Emma]

Enjoying this book, its a good one to read with other people so you can have a good debate. Love how you can pick up and read it from anywhere depending on how much you want to read...it will definitly leave you pondering

[AnnMarie · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fun and amusing book that will also make you think.
Probably a book that everyone should read; packed full of moral dilemmas & important questions.

[Elizabeth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really funny and thought provoking!

[Rhonda Hankins]

very very fun. short chapters, each chapter independent so when you have 10 minutes pick it up for a fun thought, or a "p" times three (perplexing philosophy puzzle).

[James Statham · Rating 3 out of 5]

Haven't thoroughly read this book, and have rather dipped in and out - at those puzzles that took my fancy. Think I'll have to revisit this one.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

Makes you think about the topics covered. Quite entertaining.