3 ms·
> It's usually frowned upon and recommended to avoid for Philosophy students exactly for the same reasons I think it's one of the best books ever written: > It
by smhost 6y ago
> It's usually frowned upon and recommended to avoid for Philosophy students exactly for the same reasons I think it's one of the best books ever written:
> It doesn't shy away of critique and dispute
This is nonsense. wittgenstein and nietzsche are highly regarded within philosophy departments, and they both criticize philosophy to the point of turning their backs on philosophy. russell is just not a very careful scholar of history, philosophy, or the history of philosophy.
- ZoomZoomZoom 6y agoThis is nonsense. Wittgenstein and Nietzsche didn't write anything that could be mistaken for a textbook you could learn your HoP 101 with. What you say about factual shortcoming is just one of the reasons, not the main one by any means, at least from my experience.
- smhost 6y agoThen what's your point? actual undergrad philosophy textbooks don't "shy away of critique and dispute" either. is your complaint that russell's idiosyncratic views are not foregrounded enough to your liking?