Durant, Will. The Pleasures of Philosophy: A Survey of Human
Life and Destiny. Simon and Schuster (New York: 1929, 1953).
417pp.
2002-02-14: I was enough taken by readings in
the author's The Story of Civilization that I recently tracked
down a complete used set of those volumes. As I began reading from
the beginning, I was also reading about social construction and I became
aware of the particular viewpoint that shows up in the work, a viewpoint
that doesn't find such ready agreement as the books may have encountered
in the mid-20th century. Even so, I find value. I turned to
this volume out of affinity and curiosity about Durant's personal
philosophical journey. I am struck by how much the questions that
I might have thought to be recent are apparently not so recent at all.
I wonder if Durant is a bit indignant on some directions that
philosophical inquiry has taken. To comprehend his concerns, I
will need to dig deeper than my tentative reading so far.
-- Dennis E. Hamilton
2002 February 14
p.4, concerned about usurpation of philosophy by other disciplines.
At the same time looks at epistemology and considers that "the relation
between subject and object, of the mode in which the knower knows the known,
of the objective and the subjective elements in knowledge, of the
objectivity of space and time, and the degree in which the qualities which
we ascribe to objects belong to objects or to the minds that perceive
them--these, in their details, are puzzles for the science of psychology ...
. It is a villainous accident that one actor [epistemology] in the
great drama of ideas should have usurped nearly all the roles, and mouthed
nearly all the lines, in the play of modern philosophical thought."
p.5 concerning science and experience
"Technically, as we defined it long ago, philosophy is 'a study of
experience as a whole, or of a portion of experience in relation to the
whole.'
" ... The relation of science to philosophy needs no further
clarification: the sciences are the windows through which philosophy sees
the world, they are the sense of which it is the soul; without it their
knowledge is as chaotically helpless as sensations that come to a disordered
mind, making an idiot's lore."
p.8 accuracy and trustworthiness
"Of necessity philosophy is more hypothetical than science.
Science itself must use hypothesis, but only as its starting-point; it must,
if it be science, issue in verifiable knowledge, objectively independent of
individual utility or whim."
p.10 on stability in science and changing views
"Perhaps if we desire stability of mind and soul we shall have to seek
it less in science than in philosophy. The differences among
philosophers are due rather to the changing terminology of their times than
to the hostility of their ideas; indeed, in great measure they are due to
the inconstancy of science itself, with its passionate devotion to some
hypothesis for a while, and then its satiety, and apathy, and flight to the
novel face of some younger theory."
p.11 Logic as the first realm of philosophy's kingdom, and the vestibule
of her home.
"How show we know Truth when we behold her, if we have not learned to
picture at least her semblance, and have not pondered the tests and trials
by which we shall assure ourselves of her 'real presence.'?
p.11 Home of the great dragon, epistemology
"... we must face this test too, and answer in some forgivable way the
riddle of knowledge, the problem of the reality and honesty of the world
that we perceive."
p.11 The lordly realm, metaphysics
"Here Nature hides her secret essence, and puzzles us with a hundred
clues. ... Here we may ponder the problems of matter and life, of brain and
mind, of materialism and spiritualism, of mechanism and vitalism, of
determinism and freedom. What is man? -- a thing of coils and springs
and tangled wheels, moved from without by the blind forces of earth and sky?
-- or, in his small and ridiculous way a creative god?"