100 Rus

Includes index

This was a long and dry book, but worth the read if you study philosophy. I wouldn't recommend this to beginners or people just interested in the topic. It's difficult reading and very opinionated. Keep in mind beforehand that this was written during WWII and it shows with the non-stop comparing to Hitler. To some, this is a turn off, but Russell really didn't like Hitler and was worried about people who abused philosophy at the time. In some ways, I can see how 2020 isn't that different since people seem to fear logic and embrace optimistic nostalgia a little too much.

There's a lot to take in here though. It's obvious Russell is a philosopher and isn't playing around. He likes a lot of them, but at the same time he can see the flaws in most of them. Take Plato. I liked the fact he understands Plato is one of the "fathers" of philosophy, but he also understands Plato is dated or wrong with some of his ideas. Russell isn't shy at pointing out most of these respected philosophers have backwards ideas about women, however, Russell could have talk more about women philosophy himself in this book.

Russell has a mini bio about each person he focuses on before he talks about the philosophy. I liked that part because I believe knowing about these guys helps. I see a lot of people just focus on their philosophy and seem not to care about them. Yet, unlike some fiction, the way these men think has a lot to do with their past. I have yet to read John Dewy, but Russell brings up the fact he is from New England (Vermont) and his philosophy shows that at times.

I love Russell a lot. Not sure he's my favorite philosopher, but he's not that far off from my love for Spinoza. ( )

A lengthy project. Mind-bending. Best when Russell adds his own commentary and occasional snark. Required reading for basically anybody. ( )

This book is valuable, not only for introduction it provides into philosophy, but for the compassion and integrity with which it is presented.

Bertrand Russell writes,

"When an intelligent man expresses a view which seems to us obviously absurd, we should not attempt to prove that it is somehow true, but we should try to understand how it ever came to seem true. This exercise of historical and psychological imagination at once enlarges the scope of our thinking and helps us to realize how foolish many of our own cherished prejudices will seem to an age which has a different temper of mind." (p. 39)

No truer words were ever spoken. (I often wish that other people would attempt to understand my point of view, as - I hope - I attempt to understand theirs, rather than just assuming I'm uninformed or misguided.) We like to think that we are superior to our predecessors, that we are the inheritors of an enlightened age - but perhaps it would be more accurate to simply say that we are inheritors. ( )