What do you think?
Rate this book
Retreat to Commitment
Offering an answer to the anti-rationalist argument that all rational theory rests on an irrational commitment, this book also provides a case study of modern Protestant theology. The author contends that Western philosophical traditions are authoritarian in structure.
- GenresPhilosophyTheology
312 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1962
4 people are currently reading
75 people want to read
About the author
W.W. Bartley III
18 books7 followersWilliam Warren Bartley, III (October 2, 1934 – February 5, 1990), known as W.W. Bartley, III, was an American philosopher.
After his doctoral graduation, Bartley worked as a lecturer in logic in London. Later, he held positions at the Warburg Institute and the University of California, San Diego. He was appointed to his first full professorship in 1969, at the University of Pittsburgh, where he had been teaching since 1963.
In 1973 he joined the California State University, Hayward faculty as a Professor of Philosophy, where he received the distinction of “Outstanding Professor” of the entire California State University System in 1979. His last position was that of a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
After his doctoral graduation, Bartley worked as a lecturer in logic in London. Later, he held positions at the Warburg Institute and the University of California, San Diego. He was appointed to his first full professorship in 1969, at the University of Pittsburgh, where he had been teaching since 1963.
In 1973 he joined the California State University, Hayward faculty as a Professor of Philosophy, where he received the distinction of “Outstanding Professor” of the entire California State University System in 1979. His last position was that of a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
November 25, 2012
Retreat to Commitment uses a history of the Protestant faith as a platform for launching a critique, and for sketching out an epistemology called PanCritical Rationalism. At first glance, some of the discussion of the history of Protestantism may come across as somewhat dull. However, the PanCritical Rationalist philosophy he lays out is the most logically tenable, consistently rational epistemology I have encountered from any philosopher, ever. By a long shot. It builds upon Karl Popper's work, which was impressive in its own right.
This obscure book is as important as any book in all of philosophy. It is an extremely worthwhile read for anyone who wants to think as well as possible. It is unfortunate that it is so unknown, it should be one of the enduring classics of all of humanity.
This obscure book is as important as any book in all of philosophy. It is an extremely worthwhile read for anyone who wants to think as well as possible. It is unfortunate that it is so unknown, it should be one of the enduring classics of all of humanity.
July 11, 2008
This book is about a theory of epistemology called "pancritical rationalism." The basic idea is that, since beliefs can only be justified by appealing to unjustifiable assumptions, the whole idea of justification should be abandoned in favor of criticism: rather than trying to justify your beliefs, see how well they stand up to criticism.
The philosophical point is probably sound, but I read this book with an ulterior motive -- hoping to shore up my faltering religious faith by redefining it as not so unreasonable after all -- and in that regard the book failed.
The philosophical point is probably sound, but I read this book with an ulterior motive -- hoping to shore up my faltering religious faith by redefining it as not so unreasonable after all -- and in that regard the book failed.
April 14, 2014
His demolition job on liberal Protestantism leaves lots and lots of little pieces all over. Fantastic job. His own attempts to make a case for his "pancritical rationalism" was lame. Well worth the read, if only for the phrase taken from the title.
January 4, 2019
W.W. Bartley III, a philosopher and student of the great Karl Popper, gives an interesting view on one of the most dishonest and tricky tactics employed by fundamentalists of ever stripe. He calls it the “Retreat to Commitment” - and gives helpful windows into how this maneuver is commonly deployed.
If you’re looking for a clear analysis of this trend, you’ll find it here, but be prepared for a pretty long 1/3 of the book devoted to dry philosophical distinctions.
If you’re looking for a clear analysis of this trend, you’ll find it here, but be prepared for a pretty long 1/3 of the book devoted to dry philosophical distinctions.
March 5, 2022
When I was a student at the School of Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh, during my junior and senior years, I had some freedom to choose courses in my chosen field of engineering and a few courses in math, science, and the humanities. During my freshman and sophomore years, the curriculum was highly structured with required courses in math, science, humanities (such as philosophy), and an introductory course in each field of engineering. My philosophy course was taught by William Warren Bartley III, the author of The Retreat to Commitment. Humanities courses were created specifically for engineering students; every student in them was majoring in engineering. We weren't thrilled to be taking a philosophy class, and I sensed that Professor Bartley wasn’t thrilled to be teaching engineering students. I didn't thoroughly read The Retreat to Commitment at the time, so I decided to read it now, even though it is 30 years since Professor Bartley died.
As the dust jacket blurb says, the book “probes the old debate between faith and reason, religion and science, in a new and dramatic way.” He compares Protestantism and rationality. He contends that choosing one or the other is not an irrational commitment because he has defined a new type of rationality that avoids justification and irrational choice. One concern that he has, which is a theme of the last two chapters is that the new Protestantism isn’t just an “unfortunate, intellectual development,” but that it has “some important practical results." The book is clearly written (most of the time) and gives many references to people in religion and philosophy. It isn’t so dense that it can’t be understood.
If you find philosophy interesting, which I have found it to be in my later years, you will enjoy this book, which was published in 1962. However, those who find the subject too esoteric may not want to read The Retreat to Commitment. The definition of esoteric in the dictionary on my computer defines the word as “intended for or likely to be understood by a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.” More telling is that the dictionary gives the following phrase as an example of using the word — “esoteric philosophical debates.”
As the dust jacket blurb says, the book “probes the old debate between faith and reason, religion and science, in a new and dramatic way.” He compares Protestantism and rationality. He contends that choosing one or the other is not an irrational commitment because he has defined a new type of rationality that avoids justification and irrational choice. One concern that he has, which is a theme of the last two chapters is that the new Protestantism isn’t just an “unfortunate, intellectual development,” but that it has “some important practical results." The book is clearly written (most of the time) and gives many references to people in religion and philosophy. It isn’t so dense that it can’t be understood.
If you find philosophy interesting, which I have found it to be in my later years, you will enjoy this book, which was published in 1962. However, those who find the subject too esoteric may not want to read The Retreat to Commitment. The definition of esoteric in the dictionary on my computer defines the word as “intended for or likely to be understood by a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.” More telling is that the dictionary gives the following phrase as an example of using the word — “esoteric philosophical debates.”
November 28, 2007
This is unquestionably one of the best books I've ever read. It deserves the label of a "classic" although it does not have the fame it deserves.
It is an extremely well-written, absorbing, and enjoyable book. It manages to be a fast read while making an important contribution to philosophy.
At its heart, the book is about rationality--about how we can learn. Thus the book makes philosophical claims. But it does so seamlessly in the course of a discussion of history--the modern history of Protestant thought and twentieth-century philosophy in general.
This book is totally a "must-read" if you are interested in any of the following topics: epistemology, intellectual history, the theory of education, social psychology,evolutionary models of the growth of knowledge.
It is an extremely well-written, absorbing, and enjoyable book. It manages to be a fast read while making an important contribution to philosophy.
At its heart, the book is about rationality--about how we can learn. Thus the book makes philosophical claims. But it does so seamlessly in the course of a discussion of history--the modern history of Protestant thought and twentieth-century philosophy in general.
This book is totally a "must-read" if you are interested in any of the following topics: epistemology, intellectual history, the theory of education, social psychology,evolutionary models of the growth of knowledge.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews