A History of Philosophy: Volume 4: Descartes to Leibniz

This is the first volume in Frederick Copleston's classic nine volume A History of Philosophy. Like all the volumes in this series, it is an exhaustive study of the period covered and presents the development of the philosophical thought of the period as an interrelated whole where trends ebb and flow as ideas are introduced and synthesized within the systems of the great thinkers of the time. All of this is done within a framework where Copleston, as a professor in a Catholic seminary, is mindful of pointing out the elements that would become adopted within the framework of Christian philosophy and theology. Even though Copleston has a seminary audience in mind, he does not attempt to "Christianize" those who were not Christian nor launch polemical attacks against those ideas at odds with the Christian faith. He presents the philosophical ideas thoroughly and fairly and gives both the supporting evidence cited by supporters and the critiques by opponents. Also pointed out in detail is how each philosopher's work influenced contemporaries and later thought with, of course, special consideration of the influence for good or bad on Christianity. In this volume, the subject is the philosophy of Greece and Rome. Copleston divides the book into five parts covering pre-Socratic philosophy, the Socratic period, Plato, Aristotle, and post-Aristoelian philosophy. A strength of his treatment is that the figures of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle no longer seem isolated giants but are shown to arise from the action and reaction in a whole line of Greek thinkers of which they are the most illustrious examples. And though they are deservedly given the greatest emphaisis, the work of other Greek philosophers are also given extensive coverage that is rarely found elsewhere. When dealing with the three giants, Copleston thoroughly covers how each in succession influeced the other and how each in turn fleshed out ideas in their teacher and took them in a direction that would not have found favor with their mentor. The development of Socrates' questioning to Plato's ethereal world of forms to Aristotle's reaction in a more observationally based direction demonstrates the volatile mix of ideas as various thinkers fleshed out their theories in an intellectually stimulating environment. There are also fascinating items in the lesser known philosophers of the period. Since Socrates did not author any works himself, his philosophy has primarily been communicated to us by his student Plato. It is interesting to note other students of his also wrote of his philosophy and much of the details present a somewhat different figure from that given in the Platonic corpus. Also of interest is the work in the post-Aristotelian philosophy where a mix of Neo-Platonism, Aristotelianism, and the philosophy of Hellenized Jews formed a basis for the exposition of the Christian faith in the precise technical language that would come to be used in the Ecumenical Councils. For a t

The volume is "the first volume of a complete history of philosophy". (p.v) Although to "mention a "point of view" at all, when treating of the history of philosophy, may occasion a certain lifting of eyebrows" (p. v), the author has "no hesitation in claiming the right to compose a work on the history of philosophy from the standpoint of the Scholastic philosopher"(p. vi) as "no true historian can write without some point of view, some standpoint, if for no other reason than that he must have a principle of selection, guiding his intelligent choice and arrangement of facts." (p. v) Scholastic philosophers study philosophy as the "philosophia perennis". (p. 2) Modern philosophers, especially since René Descartes (A.D. 1596 - A.D. 1650) and Immanuel Kant (A.D. 1724- A.D. 1804), divorce thought from reality and start like Descartes from Consciousness, from the fact that man has innate ideas in his mind. This is not the starting-point of Copleston and others who study philosophy as the perennial philosophy. They start from Being, not from Consciousness, and for them it is reality which imposes its structures on the mind, not like Kant, the mind imposing its structures on reality. This perennial philosophy has been outlined by Plato (428 B.C. - 348 B.C.) and Aristotle (384 B.C. - 322 B.C.) and elaborated by St. Thomas Aquinas (c. A.D. 1225 - A.D. 1274). For Copleston, perennial philosophy is Thomism in a wide sense. The Thomist system is however not closed at any given historical epoch and incapable of further development in any direction. (p. 7) Most intellectuals today, on the one hand, view Plato as interested in ideas and Aristotle as interested in things and they maintain, on the other hand, that Plato separated the Form from the objects of which it is the Form, whereas Aristotle argued that to the universal in the mind, there corresponds the specific essence in the object. Plato's and Aristotle's philosophies are therefore diametrically opposed, they say, some even going so far as to label Plato as a neo-Kantian. Copleston demonstrates that Plato is not a neo-Kantian. Copleston concludes that Platonism and Aristotelianism "should not be considered as two diametrically opposed systems, but as two complementary philosophical spirits and bodies of doctrine." (Volume I, p. 275) After having argued that a synthesis between the Platonic Theory of Forms and the Aristotelian view of the universal was needed (Volume I, p. 203), Copleston will demonstrate in Volume II how St. Thomas Aquinas achieved this synthesis and harmonised the synthesis with Christian theology. This is why, as mentioned earlier, for Copleston, perennial philosophy is Thomism in a wide sense. This also explains why for Copleston, the first three volumes of his History - Greece and Rome, Medieval Philosophy, and, Late Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy - form only one volume, why Volume III ends with "A Brief Review of the First Three Volumes" and why this review cannot but co

I've heard some people say that Copleston's writing is a bit on the dry side. Sometimes, but remember; this is philosophy we're talking about here. I recommend getting the Oxford Dictionary of philosophy if you are having trouble understanding the writing. If you are a philosophy student, this entire series is a must. Regardless of what any individual may think about the author or the series, this series is the academic standard for history of philosophy. A student cannot really get through a good philosophy degree without reading the entire series.Bottom line: Layman beware-this may be over your head! Philosophy students-this entire series is a must read.

The first volume of Frederick Copleston's monumental history of philosophy was published more than a half century ago with the intention, in the author's words, "of supplying Catholic ecclesiastical seminaries with a work that should be somewhat more detailed and of wider scope than the textbooks commonly in use and which at the same time should endeavor to exhibit the logical development and interconnection of philosophical systems." Copleston certainly attained his goal, not only for seminarians, but also for everyone interested in the history of Western thought. He ultimately produced nine brilliant volumes which still stand as the finest and most complete summary of Western philosophy from the earliest Pre-Socratics to modern Existentialists and Structuralists (the last of the volumes covering Sartre, Camus and Levi-Strauss, among others). The first volume, which covers the conception of Western philosophy in the seed of the early Ionian thinkers, through the gestation of Pythagoras, Heraclitus, Zeno, Anaxagoras, and the Sophists, ultimately culminating in the birth of Western philosophy in the axis of Socrates-Plato-Aristotle and its post-Aristotelian Roman afterbirth, is a detailed and analytical discussion of the origins of Western thought. Complete in itself, it provides a comprehensive introduction to the beginnings of Western rationalism and a useful starting point for a general study of the history of philosophy in the West or a more detailed exploration of the ancient thinkers from the Pre-Socratics to Plotinus. If any criticism can be made of Copleston's work, it is that his analyses are dominated by an overriding scholasticism, by Copleston's adherence to traditional, Thomist perspectives on these thinkers. This criticism is difficult to make, however, because he never minces words in disclosing his point of view and because, despite his own Jesuitical intellectual predilections, his treatment is always comprehensive, thoughtful and genuine.

Warning: Frederick Coplestone's history of philosophy is not for the faint of heart. This is not an introduction to philosophy: this is an in-depth, nuts and bolts, throw in every last detail you could ever possibly want to know about the subject kind of book! That said, I have to admire the man's frightening strength of will, to complete his nine volumes as he did. The first, about the Greek and Roman poets, is an excellent place to follow up a basic introduction like Will Durant's classic volume, "The Story of Philosophy." Coplestone covers all the bases, and always presents his own Jesuit philosophical stance as a clear bias, without letting it prejudice his reading. Understanding Plato and Aristotle is still an essential requirement for the civilized mind; even if their arguments have largely been disproved by science, they have still remained the starting place for any discussion of philosophy, as well as any discussion of western culture and literature.