50 Philosophy Classics: Thinking, Being, Acting, Seeing: Profound Insights and Powerful Thinking from Fifty Key Books

by Tom Butler-Bowdon

For over 2000 years, philosophy has been our best guide to the experience of being human, and the true nature of reality.

From Aristotle, Plato, Epicurus, Confucius, Cicero and Heraclitus in ancient times to 17th century rationalists Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza, from 20th-century greats Jean-Paul Sartre, Jean Baudrillard and Simone de Beauvoir to contemporary thinkers Michael Sandel, Peter Singer and Slavoj Zizek,

50 Philosophy Classics

explores key writings that have shaped the discipline and had an impact on the real world.

Philosophy can no longer be confined to academia, and

50 Philosophy Classics

shows how powerful it can be as a tool for opening our minds and helping us think. Whether you are fascinated or daunted by the big questions of how to think, how to be, how to act and how to see, this is the perfect introduction to some of humanity's greatest minds and their landmark books.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Audiobook, Reference, Politics, Classics, Books About Books

338 pages, Kindle Edition

First published April 1, 2013

Reviews

[Magdalena Golden · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid 5* for the content. The book is a wonderful introduction to the major philosophical works and certainly got me more interested in reading more, especially as far as modern philosophers are concerned.

However, I was not convinced by the alphabetic order right from the start and only got progressively more annoyed it as I was reading. I decided to read the chapters in chronological order so first I had to come up with it (I'm attaching a list at the bottom of this review for those of you who want to do the same).

That in itself was an annoying task but then having to always consult my list after every chapter and synchronising progress across my reading devices was a pain each and every time. And that jumping was made even more annoying by the fact that I found it easier to associate ideas with philosophers' names but the chapters are named after particular books which further contributed to the nuisance. It also meant I was not able to easily go back to refresh my memory which, again, was annoying because by far most of the references are chronologically anaphoric so would have made no sense to me had I decided to read the book in the order that it is presented in.

In any case, here is the chronological order:
The number in brackets refers to chapter number
1. (21) Heraclitus - Fragments - 6th century BC (mistakenly written AD in the book)
2. (12) Confucius - Analects - 5th century BC
3. (38) Plato - The Republic - 4th century BC
4. (2) Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics - 4th century BC
5. (15) Epicurus - Letters - 3rd century BC
6. (11) Cicero - On Duties - 44 BC
7. (31) Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince (1513)
8. (34) Michel de Montaigne - Essays (1580)
9. (13) René Descartes - Meditations on First Philosophy (1641)
10. (37) Blaise Pascal - Pensées (1660)
11. (47) Baruch Spinoza - Ethics (1677)
12. (30) John Locke - Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689)
13. (29) Gottfried Leibniz - Theodicy (1710)
14. (22) David Hume - An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748)
15. (41) Jean-Jacques Rousseau - The Social Contract (1762)
16. (25) Immanuel Kant - Critique of Pure Reason (1781)
17. (7) Jeremy Bentham - Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789)
18. (19) G.W.F. Hegel - Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)
19. (45) Arthur Schopenhauer - The World as Will and Representation (1818)
20. (26) Søren Kierkegaard - Fear and Trembling (1843)
21. (33) John Stuart Mill - On Liberty (1859)
22. (14) Ralph Waldo Emerson - Fate (1860)
23. (36) Friedrich Nietzche - Beyond Good and Evil (1886)
24. (8) Henri Bergson - Creative Evolution (1907)
25. (23) William James - Pragmatism (1907)
26. (20) Martin Heidegger - Being and Time (1927)
27. (42) Bertrand Russel - The Conquest of Happiness (1930)
28. (39) Karl Popper - The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934)
29. (3) A.J. Ayer - Language, Truth and Logic (1936)
30. (44) Jean-Paul Sartre - Being and Nothingness (1943)
31. (6) Simone de Beauvoir - The Second Sex (1949)
32. (49) Ludwig Wittgenstein - Philosophical Investigations (1953)
33. (1) Hannah Arendt - The Human Condition (1958)
34. (28) Thomas Kuhn - The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962)
35. (16) Michel Foucault - The Order of Things (1966)
36. (32) Marshall McLuhan - The Medium Is the Massage (1967)
37. (35) Iris Murdoch - The Sovereignty of Good (1970)
38. (40) John Rawls - A Theory of Justice (1971)
39. (27) Saul Kripke - Naming and Necessity (1972)
40. (9) David Bohm - Wholeness and the Implicate Order (1980)
41. (5) Jean Baudrillard - Simulacra and Simulation (1981)
42. (10) Noam Chomsky - Understanding Power (2002)
43. (17) Henry Frankfurt - On Bullshit (2005)
44. (48) Nassim Nicholas Taleb - The Black Swan (2007)
45. (46) Peter Singer - The Life You Can Save (2009)
46. (43) Michael Sandel - Justice (2009)
47. (50) Slavoj Žižek - Living in the End Times (2010)
48. (4) Julian Baggini - The Ego Trick (2011)
49. (24) Daniel Kahneman - Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011)
50. (18) Sam Harris - Free Will (2012)

[Bharath · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting round-up of the most prominent philosophy writings over the years. There is a good mix of philosophers across different eras.

The context at the start talks of how philosophy helps us make sense of the world. There have been broadly two approaches either based on interpreting our senses or abstract reasoning. Philosophy ia a subject I find interesting, and I liked this book. Each philosopher is covered in 3-5 pages. Though many were familiar names with their contributions, there were quite a few I did not know much about. I intend to read more on Julian Baggini, Harry Frankfurt, Soren Kierkegaard, Jean-Paul Sartre, Arthur Schopenhauer, Slavoj Zizek and a few others.

There are more classics listed in the appendix. I liked the crisp summaries which abstracted the essentials well. I found a few inclusions (such as Naseem Taleb - then why not Steven Pinker?) and omissions surprising (such as Carl Jung, Freud, Joseph Campbell but maybe they are categorised differently). The biggest limitation though is the book's focus on only western philosophers, with some sketchy references to eastern philosophies. So the wisdom of Adi Shankaracharya, J Krishnamurti, Dr S Radhakrishnan, Buddha and others is largely missing.

The author has written other '50' books, all of which seem interesting. Hopefully, I can read them sometime soon.

[Tim Krete · Rating 5 out of 5]

I throughly enjoyed this book. The attempt to make philosophy accessible is refreshing and has opened up a renewed interest in it for me personally

[Craig · Rating 4 out of 5]

*Goodreads First Reads advanced copy*

The author did a wonderful job bringing these 50 philosophies to a level of explanation where everyone can understand them. He did so in a non-judgemental/non-favoritist way, allowing the reader to decide which makes sense to them and which sounds completely foolish. The way the author presented each philosophy, with a section listing other similar philosophies adds to the readers understanding.

I definitely have a desire to check out some of these classics for myself now. I would recommend 50 Philosophy Classics to anyone interested in an introductory book on some of the most influential philosophies throughout history.

[Cav · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Perhaps the greatest divide in philosophy is between those who believe that all our information must come from the senses (the empirical, materialist view) and those who believe that truth can be arrived at through abstract reasoning (the rationalists and idealists).
The first camp has a long lineage, from the second-century skeptic Sextus Empiricus to the Englishman Francis Bacon and Scottish Enlightenment thinker David Hume, and to the twentieth-century “logical positivists,” including A.J. Ayer and philosopher of science Karl Popper.
The second camp counts among its number Plato (his theory of nonphysical “Forms” that undergird the universe), Descartes (his famous separation of mind and matter), and Kant (who resurrected the idea of “moral law” in modern philosophy).
The purpose of this book is not to tell you who is “right,” but to lay out some of the ideas and theories of note to help you make up your own mind."

Despite the above quote which captured my interest early-on here, this one ended up a bit of a mixed bag for me...
Author Tom Butler-Bowdon is a non-fiction author based in Oxford, England.

Tom Butler-Bowdon:



I don't generally like philosophy, and this book didn't really change my experience with it, sadly.
I went into this one with high hopes. I thought that the short length paid to each of the philosophers covered here might alleviate some of my frustration with this field. It didn't. I almost put this one down multiple times...

My dislike of philosophy aside, 50 Philosophy Classics is formatted well. The book goes through each of the 50 historical philosophers in an alphabetical fashion, spending five or 6 pages on each. This made the material presented easy to absorb.

Despite my best efforts, I just couldn't get past my general dislike of this topic. Unfortunately, most philosophical works I have read tend to be incredibly lengthy, dry and arduous treks of long-winded esoteric navel-gazing. Sadly, despite only dwelling on each of the 50 philosophers presented here for a few pages - much of the writing here fell in line with my previous experiences.

I don't want my personal dislike of this discipline to cause me to give an otherwise good book a bad review. However, I didn't really enjoy the writing here; neither the style, nor the content.
So, I think I'll give this one a 3-star rating, as I'm sure this book will make a great resource for those who are actually interested in philosophy...

[Osama · Rating 5 out of 5]

يقدم الكتاب ملخصا جيدا لأشهر خمسين فلسفة عالمية، ويوفر مقدمة عامة ممتعة لمن يرغب بكسر حاجز الرهبة تجاه دراسة الفلسفة.
From Aristotle, Plato, Epicurus, Confucius, Cicero and Heraclitus in ancient times to 17th century rationalists Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza, from 20th-century greats Jean-Paul Sartre, Jean Baudrillard and Simone de Beauvoir to contemporary thinkers Michael Sandel, Peter Singer and Slavoj Zize.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

A average of 6 pages dedicated to each Philosopher makes for easy reading, especially if you are not familiar with them.
The first theme of "Discover life's meaning" was enough to draw me to this book. I was not disappointed either.

I like the format of 50 different stories, where I can read a chapter, put the book down and return to it some weeks later, and start another story. Liken it to a short story book.

[Don Mario · Rating 4 out of 5]

It really keeps its promise of "insights" and "thinking". Very thought provoking, and good motivation for further reading. I think I'll get back to this book every some time.

[The Conch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Theologian and philosopher Thomas Aquinas wrote in On the Heavens: “the study of philosophy has as its purpose to know not what people have thought, but rather the truth about the way things are.”

I saw the series of 50 books of author Tom Butler at airport. The attractive point of the 50 series is that it is act like capsule containing 50 globules of knowledge and on swallowing one more access of knowledge will open.

As the name suggests, this book summarizes thoughts of fifty major western and Greek philosophers. However, except Confucius, no other occidental philosophers are given place.

The reader will find him/herself floating in the river of thoughts from ancient philosophers Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Epicurus, Heraclitus etc. to modern Daniel Kahneman, Chomsky, Peter Singer, Taleb and Slavoj Zizek.

[Samuel Ronicker · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well, it’s an odd collection of philosophers. Some of the stereotypical “classic” philosophers, but also some that wouldn’t be considered “classic” at all. The inclusion of some and the exclusion of others makes one think he has some kind of agenda, which is bad for a philosophical text.

[Kaberoi Rua · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book explains and discusses briefly, but with fantastic lucidity, some of the ideas of fifty philosophical thinkers from ancient times to the present day. The author selects a main subject from these fifty philosophers. For example, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics or Plato's Republic. What you are getting with this book is one major idea from fifty of the greatest philosophical thinkers. This book is a great philosophical resource. Throughly enjoy this little book.

[Cosmin Sipoş · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nu am ceva impotriva genului, insa pentru o carte de tip pop culture care isi propune sa accesibilizeze prapastia dintre marile idei ale filosofiei si cei neinitiati, e destul de slaba si neconvingatoare.

[Alexandru · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent selection of philosophers and a neutral presentation of various issues tackled by the selected 50. I really appreciated the modern philosopher's analysis, because the classics are already known to me. Another good point is the inclusion of various philosophers with opposable opinions on various issues. A worthy read for sure, even though often people do not like books that have in the title 100 or 50 of the best minds and so on...

My favourite parts that left a deep impact are as follows: the scepticism of A.J. Ayer; the myths of human dignity and character and the influence of situational factors of Julian Baggini; the modern era of plenty of information and lack of meaningful data described by Jean Baudrillard; Henri Bergson's optimism, a new light on Epicurus and his human hedonism, which is different from the modern definition of hedonism (being more of a Stoic it was intersting to see a new insight on hedonism); Michel Foucault relatvism; Harry Frankfurt on bulshiting in this century; Sam Harris on the illusion of free will; Williams James pragmatism; Daniel Kahneman on the importance of psychology in the finding of truth; Nassim Nicholas Taleb on the wanted "mediocristan" vs the real "extremistan"; and finally Zizek and his criticism of the capitalism with the human face and the charity as the price for consumaristic sins.

Do not get me wrong all 50 chapters of the book are worth reading, especially for those that are beginners in philosophy.

[Ozan Gencer · Rating 5 out of 5]

10 yıldız olsa 10 yıldız verirdim. Okuduğum en kıymetli 4-5 şeyden biriydi diyebilirim. Tek kelimeyle muhteşem.

Çok uzun süreye yayılmış bir okuma oldu. Yavaş okuma yaptığım zaman, bilgiyi çok daha tatmin edici bir şekilde içselleştiriyorum. Bu kadar hayran olmamın sebebi bu da olabilir tabi.

[Maddy · Rating 4 out of 5]

If your interested in Philosophy, and you simply don't know where to start, then I suggest you start here. This book introduces the reader to fifty of the greats in small bite size paragraphs. Each Philosopher gets 5-6 Pages, and in that, is a synopsys of their type of philosophy with a small section called "In a Nutshell" which I found helpful, especially the ones I was not that interested in. It's basically easy access to a subject that most find intimidating and inaccessible.
Some of my Favourites:
- Immanuel Kant - My personal favourite
- Peter Singer - Because he's Alturistic
- Plato - Classic that never gets old
- Noam Chomsky - Modern Philosophy/Politics
- John Locke - A must for everyone
- John Stuart Mill - On Liberty
- Aristotle - Happiness, A Meaningful Life

[Dzenana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Either philosophy is not my cup of tea, or condensed reports on greatest philosophy books and ideas of all time. Eitherway, nicely written

[Lloyd Downey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pretty much, every time that I've read a digest of a book as a time-saving device, I've been disappointed. And, I'm reminded of the advice of my old Philosophy lecturer, Thomas Mautner, that to understand a philosophy book you really needed to read it four times (or was it three?) ....anyway, it was certainly not to read the digest. And, to be fair to myself and my principles, when I bought this book and started reading it, I thought I was getting a set of essays by the original writers themselves. But no. This is a digest by Tom Butler-Bowdon of his-take on the 50 thinkers/writers he has selected here. I almost stopped then but I'm now glad that I persevered. I had actually read a number of these works including spending the best part of a year studying Hume's "An enquiry concerning Human Understanding".....so I thought this would mainly be a refresher for me. But the reality was that many of these authors were fairly prolific and of the 50 books selected, I think I had only read about 13. Though many the the same ideas were being canvassed by the different writers in different words, in their various books.
And, I must say, that Tom Butler-Bowdon has earned my admiration for the way that he's been able to capture the essence of the works in a clear and helpful way. Also, he's not afraid to slip in the odd critical comment or a comment that indicates how history has treated this particular work...and the flaws exposed in it.
It's not possible for me to try and do, here, a book-summary of Tom's summaries of 50 books but I will draw out a few things that were either new to me or I found especially interesting. For example:
Harry Frankfurt, "On Bullshit": "A lie can shock or startle, but we accept it as being, after all, consistent with human nature. Bullshitting, however, particularly when it extends beyond individuals to organisations and governments, is perverse, a corruption of humanity. Rejection of the "authority of truth" is favour of selling or telling a story can lead to the rise of Hitlers and Pol Pots, whose spin on history is so captivating that it attracts millions of followers".
William James, "Pragmatism": "A belief or idea has value only if it 'works'--that is, changes our world in some way. Other notions nd ideas, however, attractive or elegant, should be dismissed'. "James divides philosophers into two basic categories: the empiricists, who wish to boil everything down to naked facts and observation; and the rationalists, who believe in abstract and eternal principles. The former tend to have an unsentimental, fatalistic, irreligious, and often dark view of the world, while the latter are optimists who tend to believe in free will, spiritual order, and the unity of all things. Naturally, each camp tends to have a low view of the other.
James notes that we live in an empirically minded age, yet this still does not cancel out the natural human impulse for religion. Many find themselves caught between philosophy that does not cover spiritual needs, that offers a completely materialistic universe, and religious philosophy that does not take account of facts"......"It is astonishing to see how many philosophical disputes collapse into insignificance the moment you subject them to this simple test of tracing a concrete consequence".
Daniel Kahneman, "Thinking fast and slow": "These immediate impressions Kahneman describes as fast or System 1 thinking. We use this much more often than slow, deliberative, System 2 thinking, which can include anything from filling out a tax form, to parking in a narrow space, to trying out an argument. System 2 thought involves attention and effort, or, to use a philosophical word, reason.
The systems can operate in tandem. When System I cannot solve a problem immediately, it calls on System 2, with its detailed and deliberate procesing, to
chew it over and come up with an answer. System l allows us to drive along a highway without thinking about driving; System 2 kicks in when we suddenly
need to think where we are going. System l allows us to read a story to our daughter without actually taking it in; System 2 comes to life when she asks a question".........Our brains are set up to detect a predator in a fraction of a second, much quicker than the part of the brain that acknowledges one has been seen. That is why we can act before we even "know we are acting. "Threats are privileged above opportunities" Kahneman says. This natural tendency means that we "overweight unlikely events, such as being caught in a terrorist attack. It also leads to us overestimating our chances of winning the lottery.
"Act calm and kind regardless of how you feel" is good advice, Kahneman says....."In the 1970s, most social scientists made an assumption that people are generally rational and their thinking sound, but that sometimes emotion hijacks this rationality. In fact, things work more the other way around. We draw on the rational mind only when we really need it. Our thought is not "corrupted" by emotion; instead, much of our thinking is emotional".
Friederich Nietzsche, "Beyond good and evil".......this was one of the books that I have read before (some 60 years ago) .....though I have no recollections of what he said....though I do recall that he went insane towards the end of his life....that must have been in the prologue. ........:"In spite of all the value which may belong to the true, the positive and the unselfish, it might be possible that a higher and more fundamental value for life should generally be assigned to pretence, to the will to delusion, to selfishness and cupidity Perhaps good and evil are more knitted together than we think, though (in the interests of purity) we like to see them as separate.
Good and evil are a creation of humankind"........"....philosophers are not lovers of wisdom, but lovers of their wisdom. At the heart of each of their world views is a moral position, and "knowledge" is the costume in which it is dressed". ....On free will :"I shall never tire of emphasising a small, terse fact, namely, that a thought comes when 'it' wishes, and not when 'I' wish."
Plato, "The Republic": "Athenian leaders gained power by telling voters what they wanted to hear, when they should have been charting a plan for the health of the state.The result was a pleasing, lawless, various sort of government, distributing equality to equals and
unequals alike"....."Plato's alternative is an elite governing body of philosophers whose sole purpose is to work for the good of the state.
Plato suggests that we should not expect a nation or state to be run properly by merchants, tradesman, or soldiers, but only by those who have the best general overview of what constitutes the good in society. A society run by soldiers would be always at war and limit freedom to its citizens; a state run by businessmen would course with envy and materialism; Only a highiy educated generalist, trained over many years in abstract subjects (Socrates suggests 10 years' study of mathematics before moving on to philosophy). can govern well." ....."The Republics power lies not in its provision of a template for government (it is unlikely that we will ever see states run by "philosopher kings"), but in showing how the qualities of wisdom, courage, self-discipline, and justice make for well-balanced individuals".
John Rawls, "A theory of justice": "The best societies are those that do not simply offer personal freedom but lessen the lottery of life by giving a fair chance for all"......"Rawls proposes his own principles by which a just society could be guided:
1. There must be basic freedoms (e.g., of speech, association, religion).
2. The inequalities that inevitably result from freedom are so arranged to bring most benefit to the worst off, including full equality of opportunity.
The first "priority rule" supporting these principles is that freedom can only be restricted when it results in other freedoms. As Rawls puts it, "a less extensive liberty must strengthen the total system of liberty shared by all
The second priority rule is that justice is always more important than efficiency or utility of outcomes. Specifically, equal opportunity is more important than achieving a certain whole-of-society outcome, or what some government may believe is for the good of the people"..........The big problem, as Rawls sees it, with existing theories for achieving ajust society lies in the biases and prejudices of those charged with running it. To get around this, he makes his famous "veil of ignorance" proposal. Every member in society agrees to voluntary and temporary amnesia. As the veil of ignorance descends on them, they forget who they are and the place they hold in society, so that fairness to all is their main concern. After all, Rawls notes, if someone knew they were rich, they might want to oppose taxes welfare policies, not only because it might reduce their fortune, but because they may have conditioned themselves to see welfare as an unjust principle. The veil of ignorance eliminates such prejudices, because each person is blind to their station in life".
Jean-Jaques Rousseau, "The Social Contract": "Only through living in a framework of laws can people flourish. While they can be happy (in a brute sort of way) living in a state of nature, they can never reach their fullest potential, because only society provides an environment that can develop human virtues, and it is virtues that elevate man. Political equality and freedom are not natural rights, but rights required for the highest kind of human being or community to come into existence"........"The social pact between individual and state requires that individuals who "refuse to obey the general will shall be constrained to do so by the whole body Rousseau puts this even more plainly: 'such an individual will be forced to be free'."...."All the individual desires balance each other out, and from this melee emerges the wider public interest. Rousseau warns that we should always be on our guard against some sectional or group interest becoming so powerful that it skews the general will".
Bottom line is that I think Butler Bowdon has done a first rate job of summarising and putting into context the works of 50 significant philosophers and he's convinced me to seek out more of his works. I give the book five stars.

[Ashik Uzzaman · Rating 4 out of 5]

I finished the audiobook today and overall liked it. I didn't like the fact that the philosophers were presented in the order of their last name. I think it would be very appropriate to order them in terms of their birth or death time to have a sequence how various ideas in philosophy developed over time. Another thing I am not clear is what was the criteria to pick the below 50 philosophers. For example, how come Averroes (Ibn Rush) and his theory of the unit of the intellect did not get a place in this list? Despite that, I think this book is a great start for people who are thinking to get familiar with the history of philosophy.

Below is the list of books covered in 50 Philosophy Classics.

1. Hannah Arendt - The Human Condition (1958)
2. Aristotle Nicomachean - Ethics (4th century BC)
3. AJ Ayer - Language, Truth and Logic (1936)
4. Julian Baggini - The Ego Trick (2011)
5. Jean Baudrillard - Simulacra and Simulation (1981)
6. Simone de Beauvoir - The Second Sex (1952)
7. Jeremy Bentham - Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789)
8. Henri Bergson - Creative Evolution (1911)
9. David Bohm - Wholeness and the Implicate Order (1980)
10. Noam Chomsky - Understanding Power (2002)
11. Cicero - On Duties (44 BC)
12. Confucius - Analects (5th century BC)
13. Rene Descartes - Meditations (1641)
14. Ralph Waldo - Emerson Fate (1860)
15. Epicurus - Letters (3rd century BC)
16. Michel Foucault - The Order of Things (1966)
17. Harry Frankfurt - On Bullshit (2005)
18. Sam Harris - Free Will (2012)
19. GWF Hegel - Phenomenology of Spirit (1803)
20. Martin Heidegger - Being and Time (1927)
21. Heraclitus - Fragments (6th century)
22. David Hume - An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748)
23. William James - Pragmatism (1904)
24. Daniel Kahneman - Thinking: Fast and Slow (2011)
25. Immanuel Kant - Critique of Pure Reason (1781)
26. Søren Kierkegaard - Fear and Trembling (1843)
27. Saul Kripke - Naming and Necessity (1972)
28. Thomas Kuhn - The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962)
29. Gottfried Wilhelm - Leibniz Theodicy (1710)
30. John Locke - An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690)
31. Marshall McLuhan - The Medium is the Massage (1967)
32. Niccolo Machiavelli - The Prince (1532)
33. John Stuart - Mill On Liberty (1859)
34. Michel de Montaigne - Essays (1580)
35. Iris Murdoch - The Sovereignty of Good (1970)
36. Friedrich Nietzsche - Beyond Good and Evil (1886)
37. Blaise Pascal - Pensees (1670)
38. Plato - The Republic (4th century BC)
39. Karl Popper - The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934)
40. John Rawls - A Theory of Justice (1971)
41. Jean-Jacques Rousseau - The Social Contract (1762)
42. Bertrand Russell - The Conquest of Happiness (1920)
43. Michael Sandel - Justice (2009)
44. Jean Paul Sartre - Being and Nothingness (1943)
45. Arthur Schopenhauer - The World as Will and Representation (1818)
46. Peter Singer - The Life You Can Save (2009)
47. Baruch Spinoza - Ethics (1677)
48. Nassim Nicholas Taleb - The Black Swan (2007)
49. Ludwig Wittgenstein - Philosophical Investigations (1953)
50. Slavoj Zizek - Living In The End Times (2010)

[Rory Fox · Rating 3 out of 5]

An informative overview of some significant philosophers, but the relationships between different philosophers and their ideas were not always very clear.

The breadth of the 50 Philosophers (and their books) includes a good representation of what Anglo Europeans think of as Philosophy. It would have been good to have more inclusion of Asian, Arabic and African thinkers as this would have provided a context to reflect on the nature of what the Western world thinks of as Philosophy itself.

The short extracts on each writer were generally well balanced presentations of their thought. It is extremely difficult to sum up in just a few pages, complex thinkers who have written hundred of thousands of words. So the author deserves congratulations for the summaries.

I also appreciated the way that the author went out of his way to credit Harriet Taylor as contributing to John Stuart Mill’s thinking. It is all too easy to forget that great Philosophers often owed intellectual debts, and in eras when women’s voices were drowned out it is particularly important to identify those influences and credit them.

A less desirable element of the book was the way that it is structured around an alphabetic list of philosophers. I can see how this avoids imposing the author’s views about a specific structure on their thinking. But it leads to a disjoined reading experience as ideas are split up according to the random criteria of an author’s surname.

For example, Simone de Beauvoir appears near the beginning of the book, and John Paul Sartre appears near the end. Yet the closeness in their thinking (and lives) would have made more sense to group them together. This is especially so as de Beauvoir’s views about women are arguably an exemplification of Sartre’s existentialist focus upon freedom and conditioning.

The structure of the book also meant that readers were not able to engage with the subsections that philosophy is normally divided into for teaching purposes. There was no “section” on Metaphysics or Epistemology, so it was not possible to trace the development of ideas within those areas. For example, although empiricists and idealists were featured in the book, their texts were not set against each other to show how they argued with each other and learned and developed their ideas.

Overall, this is an interesting book to dip into, but its structure makes it less useful for getting an overview of the subject.

[Karlie · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good book aside from the fact that it ignores the contributions of female philosophers.

I’m not sure how one writes a book on Western Philosophy classics and somehow only 3/50 philosophers mentioned are women. That’s not only a glaring omission, it’s also highly sexist and flat-out lazy writing. In places where he could have mentioned female philosophers, the author chose instead to list modern but obscure male philosophers who, upon reading their entry in this book, don’t really deserve to be listed in this book.

A very specific example: Michael Sandel has no business being included in this book. Nothing against him personally, but he’s not a classic philosopher. Nothing he actually says is new or unique to him; much of his schtick is just a mediocre regurgitation of the thoughts of others. It seemed to me that the only reason he was included in this text was because he’s a living white male. It would have been better for the book to remove him and instead have an article about Hypatia, or Mary Wollstonecraft, or Anne Conway- ALL of whom have contributed so much more than Sandel has or ever will. Gosh, even an entry on Ayn Rand would have been more valid than one on Michael Sandel. I don’t like her philosophy one bit but undeniably she had a much larger, longer-lasting impact on philosophy and is more worthy of inclusion in this book.

Having said that, this is a good refresher if you’re returning to philosophy studies, and it makes for a good introduction to the subject if you are new. Be warned, reading this will absolutely cripple your TBR list.

[Daline Ly · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a young amateur entering the world of philosophy, I can't stress enough how much this book have helped me wrap my head around, some of the most complex ideas and put it in four pages so eloquently. The world of philosophy can be overwhelming as one is bombarded with many philosophers: where do i even begin? what is my philosophy? who should I know?

Although Bowdon tried to summarize each philosopher's idea in a "nutshell" there are times when i wish it could be further elaborated due to its complexity, nonetheless his writing and explanation makes philosophy accessible for anyone as long as he/she has an interest in this field. Because of how dense the content of this book is, I have spent months reading this book, and there are times when my brain feel completely drained after (definitely worth it though).

[Moira McPartlin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am starting to take baby steps into the world of philosophy, but a look at the philosophy shelves in my local bookshop bamboozle me. There is so many different strands, and they all seem to disagree with each other. I found this book in my local library and it saved me. The author has chosen 50 wide ranging books of philosophical works and explains in very accessible language what the books and authors are about. Each chapter begins with some quotes, there is an 'In a nutshell' sentences and also an 'In a similar vein' list to allow you to group the works into their strands. At the end he lisys a further 50 works for consideration. So I now have 100 philosophy books to add to my toppling 'to be read' pile.

[Kai Mustakoski · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've read quite a few books of this kind that try to convey the ideas of philosophers in a nutshell, and I have to say that this book does it perfectly. The author balances the amount of information on any given philosopher very well: not too little, not too much. Also, the author has the ability to explain complex ideas extremely well.

A lot of times books like this are very frustrating, mostly because they try to morally judge the philosophers they are talking about. Also, most of them are just too academic.

This book is perfect for the purpose it was made for!

6/5 (because it actually succeeds in doing what it set out to do)

[Seth · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really good way to pick up on all the philosophy classes your education system failed to provide. A good variety of thought, some wacky ideas, a few that really hit the nail on the head. Obviously depending on the reader. A couple of that was so deep you had to just stare at the page whilst you tried to navigate through space and time to come to some remote understanding of what they were on about. All in all a great exploration of thought throughout the history of humankind, just enough to scratch the surface.

[PuriP · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great synthesis of the most famous philosophers, presenting some of their cardinal ideas. The only aspect that I did not enjoy about this book is the inclusion of too many contemporary personalities, who in my opinion are not nearly as valuable for the field of philosophy as their predecessors, whose contributions shaped society as we know it. Maybe some of those philosophers of our time will become "classic" in the future, but I felt that they have been included in this book to early, their ideas not being completely assimilated into this field yet.

[Book Grocer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Purchase 50 Philosophy Classics here for just $12!

This is a fantastic book for anyone who is interested in learning some philosophy but is not quite sure where to start. With his concise summaries of both classical and modern philosophical texts, Tom Butler-Bowdon has taken content that is normally quite difficult to wrap your head around and unpacked it in a way that is accessible and easy to follow.

Leea - The Book Grocer

[Zlati · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book so much. Concise and to the point concepts from some of the brightest minds in the field. The only thing I wished for was diversity- too much western, not enough world philosophy. For example, no Russian or African thought, very little Eastern and Middle Eastern thought. Nonetheless lovely and efficiently structured read.

[Joshua Lawson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great overview of some of the major western philosophers from the past 2500 years. I wasn't familiar with all the names but every chapter held my interest. It also struck me for the first time while going through this list how few female philosophers there have been throughout history.

[William Schram · Rating 5 out of 5]

Contains key points of 50 works of philosophy, organized by the author's last name.

[Philip · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent compendium!