Thinking through Philosophy: An Introduction (Cambridge International Examinations)

I consider this the best introduction to philosophy that I've read. I've read over a dozen philosophy 101 type volumes, and it always amazes me that over a dozen different interpretations invariably are presented. But there's nothing wrong with that because each author imparts his own unique wisdom to the subject and you seldom read the same thing twice. Typically an introductory text follows the format of an historical approach starting with the pre-Socratic Greeks and no update appears needed.Nevertheless, this book is different and one senses a significant updated treatment. Anyone following current trends in philosophy who reads this book recognizes something positively different indeed. We have a treatment of topics which includes very contemporary contributors and approach of topics. Also, it's quite readable with a minimum of jargon which when presented is plainly explained. Much of the time the authors will avoid a common philosophical label altogether, which only distracts from a train of thought, and they will replace the idea with ordinary language.Each chapter is self-contained and for the non-student reader can be read cover-to-cover like a fascinating novel. The authors obviously put a great deal of thought into the organization of chapters. There's a coherent and meaningful link from one topic to the next. The story starts with metaphysics exploring what is real? - which leads into what we think we know through epistemology. But how do we know? The next chapter is the philosophy of mind which ponders that question.I found the treatment of logical behaviorialism a bit overrefined and would suggest a revision to include simpler diagrams as they later did with Pascal's Wager. A personal disappointment was that no mention of Bridgeman's "Operationalism" was made. Understandably, no discussion of psychological behavioralism was stated in this philosophy text, but "Operationalism" might be a logical lead-in to the next chapter on science.As another reviewer states, the next chapter on ethics leaves no topic untouched. As throughout the book, in italics a commentary with pointed questions leads to a response which then covers every aspect of ethics.The questioning commentary provides a sort of Socratic dialogue to guide discussion.The next two chapters on political philosophy and aesthetics tend to be more abstract and abstruse then up to this point, but as throughout the book they're very up to date. The authors oppose libertarian political thought to social democracy which probably should be opposed instead to statism in general. Democratic socialism isn't considered intrinsically statist at all (but is called a potential form of "paternalism" which says as much). And conservativism is ignored that might be opposed to social democracy (which is often labeled "liberal" in the USA). They also don't distinguish between anarchy and anarchism which is closer to libertarianism.Aesthetics is usually ignored in most philosophy texts but the authors do a quite creditable job taking us up to speed on the topic. Their focus lies on "the value of art" rather than "what is art?". They analyze and evaluate how art gives us pleasure, captures reality through imitation, displays expression of thoughts and feelings, and displays recurrent forms. I found the discussion of formalism that stresses artistic elements like tone, pitch, shapes, patterns, which vary from artwork to artwork seems to apprehend the most arresting feature of art. The search for forms seem to correspond to an inter-subjective agreement of especially Lockeian primary but also secondary qualities.The concluding chapter of the book appropriately returns to a metaphysical commentary by way of the philosophy of religion. It speculates on perennial topics such as the "problem of evil" which the authors thoughtfully suggest should be renamed the "problem of suffering". They also thoroughly explore the implications of science on religion. They point out that Nietzsche had definite thoughts on the matter and declared that science became the more reliable purveyor of knowledge and that metaphorically "God is dead" as a result. I am left with the impression that a great deal of religiosity comes about through freewill thinking but also perhaps inadvertent wishful thinking. I wish the authors would have had something to say about non-monotheistic ideas such as agnosticism, pantheism, or atheism.

This book is a great introduction to Philosophy with easy to understand analogies and explanations of concepts. My only gripe is there are some grammatical issues mainly the use of 'she' instead of other gender neutral/inclusive terms.

I used this book as my cheat-sheet for an Intro to Philosophy course for my home-schooled senior. The book takes you through the major categories of philosophic issues, like philosophy of art, political philosophy, and metaphysics. The book does a good job of illustrating the rhythm and armature of philosophy: question, theory, bash the theory, answer the bashers, assess the status quo, pose new questions. The book also includes brief biographies on a few prominent philosophers, though this isn't a real focus of the book. Of course, as an introductory text, Horner's book skims the surface, but it is certainly an accessible starting point for a student taking a philosophy, or anyone who wants to get into philosophy but isn't sure where to start. Also, it is an excellent model of "doing" philosophy.

Most introductory Philosophy books provide you with a list of various philosophers throughout time and give you an overview of their thoughts. If this is the type of book you are looking for then try "Story of Philosophy" or "Spark Notes 101 Philosophy". However, I believe this approach misses something.I found that a far better approach was to provide the reader with the major areas and questions addressed by philosophers and then use reason and logic to examine those areas and questions. When appropriate a major philosophers views on a question being examined should then be provided. Here are some sample philosophical areas and questions:- Logic: How do we think? Inductive and Deductive Reason, etc.- Epistemology: Is knowledge possible? How do we "know"?- Metaphysics: What is reality and what exists? What is truth?- Ethics: What is right and wrong? Are values relative?- Aesthetics: What is Art? Does true beauty exist?- Politcs: How should we be governed? Are we our brothers keeper?- Religion: Does God exist? Do we have freewill?Finding these questions and coming up with your own answers is what philosophy is truly about.The first book I found that took this approach was "Philosophy For Dummies". Unfortunately the author is very religious and that comes through strongly in his book. I remember reading this book and loving the way he layed out the questions, but wishing there was another book out there that was written from a non-religious standpoint."Thinking through Philosophy" is exactly the book for which I was looking. It lays out the major questions of philosophy and provides you with different approaches to answering these questions. I particularly like his arguements for the philosophies of idealism and relativism even though I still disagree with both (the authors definately make you think). The only critisism I have is that some basic knowledge is assumed. For example, the topic of skeptism was handled far more thouroughly in "Philosophy For Dummies".If I were rating this book as a first book on philosophy I would only give it 4 stars, but as a second or later philosophy book I definately give it 5 stars. I really liked this book. (For a first book I would still recommend "Philosophy For Dummies" even though I'm agnostic/athiest. If you already believe in a higher power then definately read it first.)

We used this book for our Introduction to Philosophy class. Everyone in our class liked the book because of the content and language.

Pack with content.