13 of 17 people found the following review helpful
This review is from: Wittgenstein: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) (Paperback)
I was a little uncertain about this book as I was very unimpressed with one of Grayling's more general introductory philosophy books. However this is an excellent introduction to Wittgenstein's thought (and in that respect (alone) superior to Monk's outstanding biography).
But, the assessment and comments on Wittgenstein's work seem at times like caricature (I will concede that Grayling is probably simplifying considerably more nuanced, sophisticated arguments so it may just seem that way).
His criticisms actually succeeded in making me more interested in Wittgenstein - what Grayling often highlighted as a flaw, I felt properly (or at least better) understood could be a significant strength.
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 12 Feb 2012 18:39:54 GMT
I have a (surely reasonable) expectation that a review which tells me that a book dealing with a philosopher is worth reading, should give me at least some brief idea of what the author of the book sees as the key views of the philosopher in question, and secondly, should express an opinion as to whether and why what the philosopher has to say is worth knowing about. The above review contributes nothing to "making me more interested in Wittgenstein", nor does it encourage me to become interested in Wittgenstein in the first place, if I had been Wittgenstein-ignorant prior to reading Grayling.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›