Philosophy Made Simple
HOLLANDER, PAUL
Philosophy Made Simple Maybe too simple—when philosophers are reduced to one question. BY PAUL HOLLANDER I approached this volume with high expectations, given my admiration for...
...Anselm: Finally there is the most general question suggested by Anselm...
...Apparently Kolakowski had to undertake the unenviable task of excising Aristotle, Meister Eckhart, Nicholas of Cusa, Hobbes, Heidegger, Jaspers, and Plotinus...
...In his short introduction Kolakowski notes that he did not intend to provide “some sort of a super-condensed textbook, encyclopaedia or dictionary” but wished “to approach these great philosophers by concentrating on one idea in the thought of each—an important idea, an idea that was fundamental” to his philosophy...
...Are ordinary human emotions—love and compassion, sadness and joy— simply proof of our ignorance and immaturity . . . ? [I]t seems that . . . the perfect Stoic is a rarity, a freak, a monstrosity...
...Particularly regrettable is the absence of a conclusion, or summation of the major themes and propositions dissected...
...it is the good with which we are born, with which God created us...
...The question that arises . . . is this: Is it irrational to believe in God if we know that there is no reliable evidence—evidence of the kind that can withstand scientifi c scrutiny—of His presence...
...And if so, is it worth rediscussing...
...There is also an occasional coyness in his reluctance to take a position about the propositions and beliefs under examination here...
...Could we really fi nd happiness in such indifference...
...on the contrary he insisted . . . that faith precedes them all...
...I believe in order to understand.’ . . . [H]e did not try to make faith dependent on the validity of his arguments...
...At the same time, while discussing the views of these philosophers, Kolakowski does not exactly make a case for religious belief, or the existence of God...
...This makes a reviewer’s task diffi cult, since he cannot discuss the author’s views of each of the 23 philosophers...
...These terminologies often interfere with clarity and understanding...
...Tertullian famously proposed, “Credo quia absurdum...
...Kolakowski, himself a religious believer, suggests that “there is something rather than nothing,” and I assume that this “something” is an allusion to God, divinity, or the supernatural...
...Our reason sees that its ability to grasp eternal truths was not created by its own powers but comes from that source which itself is the truth and the highest good...
...It is no small task to summarize the key contributions and questions raised by 23 philosophers “who opened up new directions of thought for future generations...
...Can we fi nd any meaning in . . . ” applied across-the-board could have been the key question that Kolakowski does not raise in the rest of his book...
...Regardless of who gets the credit for the originality of this venerable idea, the reader would like to know what Leszek Kolakowski thinks about the matter, especially given those ironic quotation marks around the word irrational, and his own convictions are only occasionally glimpsed, as at the end of his summary of the thoughts of Epictetus: Cultivating a Stoic indifference to twists of fate and unexpected material losses, viewing one’s life as one would view a fi lm, is probably a good strategy for living...
...Or would it, on the contrary, impoverish them...
...for the soul, since it is the receptacle of eternal truths, understands its own participation Paul Hollander is the author, most recently, of The End of Commitment: Intellectuals, Revolutionaries and Political Morality...
...For example, he writes this about St...
...he seems to take it for granted...
...You could, of course, substitute for “Nietzschean chaos” “Augustinian chaos,” or “Hegelian” or “Kantian,” and other precepts or propositions examined here...
...And if it is irrational what does ‘irrational’ mean here...
...The title offers a further clue...
...It would have been illuminating and helpful if Kolakowski had raised in each chapter the question that concludes his discussion of Nietzsche: “Can we fi nd any meaning to our existence in the Nietzschean chaos, any way to live in the belief that life is worth living...
...But would such indifference be a good and desirable thing if it were total, all-encompassing...
...And the major, nagging question this survey of thinkers has inspired in me is this: Could so many of these writerphilosophers be as abstruse and irrelevant as they seem to be, or have our intellectual sensibilities coarsened to such a degree that we cannot grasp the importance of their thoughts...
...far better . . . than the feverish pursuit of socalled success, fame and riches—a pursuit that in most cases is fruitless...
...And because we are capable of grasping eternal, immutable truths, we are also capable to grasp that we too, are immortal...
...in the eternal order...
...This truth is not . . . a remembrance of something once learnt—in a previous existence—and later forgotten...
...I further expected that the preoccupations of the great thinkers would help to better grasp the dilemmas and diffi culties of modernity—in short, some discussion of why the ideas of these philosophers matter, here and now...
...BY PAUL HOLLANDER I approached this volume with high expectations, given my admiration for Kolakowski’s work (testifi ed to by the very positive reviews I have written in the past, one of them on these pages...
...Instead, this is a fragmented collection of stabs at the views of these philosophers and, especially, their grapplings with the existence of God and some basic issues of epistemology...
...And the lucidity of Kolakowski’s exposition is greatly (and often u n h e l p f u l l y ) infl uenced by the questionable clarity of some of the authors he examines...
...and ending with Husserl (18591938...
...Well, has it not been axiomatic that faith is independent of (if not outright antithetical to) reason...
...Space does not permit to list the 23 retained, but there seems to be a preponderance of thinkers preoccupied with the existence of God, or at any rate a focus on issues of religion...
...I had hoped, among other things, to gain access to an enlightening summary of the central ideas of the philosophers discussed, and corresponding insights into the essential and durable themes of Western philosophy...
...An observation he makes about Edmund Husserl applies to several of the authors discussed: “It is hard to talk about Husserl without recourse to his own terminology, for his writings teem with neologisms...
...In the original work, fi rst published in Polish, there were an additional seven, removed at the publisher’s request to save space...
...Of course, he cannot be blamed for not making crystal clear the murkier ideas of Saint Augustine, Bergson, Hegel, or Kierkegaard...
...It concerns his famous sentence: ‘I do not desire to understand in order to believe...
...Should we really aspire to remain untroubled and unmoved by death and suffering...
...raises far more questions than it answers...
...While few, whether believers or non-believers, would quarrel with such sentiments, Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing...
...I would have liked to know what criteria Kolakowski used for selecting these philosophers, especially in light of the omission of such fi gures as Aristotle, Bacon, Bentham, Erasmus, James, Marx, Mill, Rousseau, and Russell, among others...
...They’re not grouped in any way, but listed more or less chronologically, beginning with Socrates (469-399 B.C...
...The modern reader is also likely to have some trouble absorbing some of the observations of Saint Augustine, such as this one: We can see the traces of God in our souls directly, because the soul is where the truth resides...
...And would it enrich our lives...
Vol. 13 • March 2008 • No. 27
