I love Russel and his insightful presentation of the last few thousand years of philosophy is well structured even if overly historicised
.
The problem is this book was from lectures written to the late 40’s and it leaves a gap that is just too wide for it to feel current. It is interesting in what main issues sre identified that are relevant today, but it also misses many others, the world philosophical issues have gone far beyond what is described and there remains a vast gap.
I wouod read a different history of philosophy despite my admiration for the author and his work. ( )

Quando l'ho iniziato non mi ha colpito molto: "il solito libro di filosofia" ho pensato. Poi, pian piano, si è rivelato per quello che è: un GRAN BEL libro di filosofia, scritto bene (anche se la traduzione su alcuni punti un po' barcolla), spiegato benissimo, dove i giudizi sono personalissimi, condivisibili o meno ma sempre giustificati e sostenuti da ottimi spunti logici (e filosofici). Peccato sia stato scritto durante la seconda guerra mondiale e quindi sostanzialmente si fermi a Marx, lasciando Wittgenstein e Aaarendt (ad esempio) fuori.
Molto bello, veramente. ( )

Bertrand Russell se guió en esta obra por el más ajustado sentido de la unidad histórica y estudió a cada filósofo en relación con el medio en que actuó, teniendo siempre en cuenta las circunstancias sociales y políticas de su época.

This was a long and dry book, but worth the read if you study philosophy. I wouldn't recommend this to beginners or people just interested in the topic. It's difficult reading and very opinionated. Keep in mind beforehand that this was written during WWII and it shows with the non-stop comparing to Hitler. To some, this is a turn off, but Russell really didn't like Hitler and was worried about people who abused philosophy at the time. In some ways, I can see how 2020 isn't that different since people seem to fear logic and embrace optimistic nostalgia a little too much.

There's a lot to take in here though. It's obvious Russell is a philosopher and isn't playing around. He likes a lot of them, but at the same time he can see the flaws in most of them. Take Plato. I liked the fact he understands Plato is one of the "fathers" of philosophy, but he also understands Plato is dated or wrong with some of his ideas. Russell isn't shy at pointing out most of these respected philosophers have backwards ideas about women, however, Russell could have talk more about women philosophy himself in this book.

Russell has a mini bio about each person he focuses on before he talks about the philosophy. I liked that part because I believe knowing about these guys helps. I see a lot of people just focus on their philosophy and seem not to care about them. Yet, unlike some fiction, the way these men think has a lot to do with their past. I have yet to read John Dewy, but Russell brings up the fact he is from New England (Vermont) and his philosophy shows that at times.

I love Russell a lot. Not sure he's my favorite philosopher, but he's not that far off from my love for Spinoza. ( )

A lengthy project. Mind-bending. Best when Russell adds his own commentary and occasional snark. Required reading for basically anybody. ( )