The Story of Philosophy

Title: The Story of Philosophy – The Lives and Opinions of the World’s Greatest Philosophers from Plato to John Dewey

Author: Will Durant

Publisher: Unknown, 1933 (First published 1926)

ISBN: 9780671739164 (typical)

Pages: 543

The term ‘philosophy’ has something repulsive in the nature it sounds for most of us mortals. That is because it is most of the time mixed with obscure metaphysics that lives only in the abstract domain. This book was with me unopened for about 25 years. But when the unexpected Covid lockdown dried up my reservoir of books, there was no other option than seeking refuge in the lap of the good old dusty volume sitting in the corner of my bookshelf. It took much time to complete, but now I am not so averse to philosophy. I don’t pretend that I have understood it all, but what I had assimilated after reading the book has spawned a new respect for philosophy. Philosophy is in fact organized thinking about the fundamental nature of the world, society and man. Queries on god and soul originate as a corollary to the serious researcher, but there is enough to satisfy an inquisitive lay reader in this book which presents the great philosophers from Plato to John Dewey and the system of knowledge they promulgated. Philosophy attempts to coordinate the real in the light of the ideal. It begins when one learns to doubt, particularly to doubt one’s cherished beliefs, dogmas and axioms. Will Durant was an American writer, historian and philosopher who was best known for his work ‘The Story of Civilization’ in eleven volumes. ‘The Story of Philosophy’ is widely described as a groundbreaking work that helped to popularize philosophy.

Durant chalks out his role as a ground-breaking exercise. The difference between philosophy and science is first of all clearly established. Philosophy deals with problems that are not yet open to the methods of science like good and evil, order and freedom. As soon as a field of enquiry yields knowledge susceptible to exact formulation, it is called science. The role of an interpreter to smoothen the ride of the novices is also spelt out. If knowledge becomes too great for communication, it would degenerate into scholasticism and mankind would slip into a new age of faith, worshipping its new priests at a respectful distance. A teacher mediates between the specialist and the nation, learning the specialist’s technical jargon and breaks down the barriers between knowledge and need. The author dons that mantle for us.

Of the varied characteristics of the philosophers mentioned in the book, the readers can quickly follow the arguments of the ancient masters such as Plato and Aristotle than more recent ones. Plato had such an avid concern for philosophy that he wanted it to be taught first only after the student has reached 30 years of age; that too, after eliminating a great many through a selection process. The philosophers were never fond of socialism and would have recoiled in horror at the thought of ‘simplifying’ their work for the consumption of the masses like what this book does. Aristotle had a far-reaching writ in philosophy through his thoughts. Many of the indispensable terms we now use for philosophical thought such as faculty, maxim, mean, category and energy etc. were minted in Aristotle’s mind. With his death, the world awaited the resurrection of philosophy for a thousand years. His works were translated by Nestorians into Syriac in fifth century CE and thence into Arabic and Hebrew in the tenth century. By the year 1225, its Latin translations were ready, thereby making them accessible to Europe. Crusaders brought back more accurate copies of works. With the fall of Constantinople in 1453, Greek scholars of the city brought further Athenian treasures with them, when they fled from the besieging Turks.

The legacy of Aristotle reigned supreme through the Middle Ages till it was challenged by Francis Bacon. He resolved to set philosophy into a more fertile path, to turn it from scholastic disputation to the illumination and increase of human good. As with other philosophers, the democratic spirit did not appeal to Renaissance thinkers as well. Bacon distrusts people, who were in his day without access to education. Philosophers pined for an aristocracy which was entitled to rule. Plato had even called for a philosopher king.

The turf of philosophy too witnessed the transition of economic and political processes from feudal aristocracy to the rule of the middle class. Voltaire and Rousseau were the two voices that signaled this process. The first stirrings of dethronement of kings from history were seen in Voltaire’s philosophy of history in its attempt to trace the streams of natural causation in the development of European mind. The nineteenth century saw monarchy give way to universities as the asylum of philosophers.

Nietzsche’s philosophy was said to be the theoretical bedrock of autocratic polities of the Nazis and Fascists. Durant gives a faithful narrative of the German scholar’s thought that is sure to upset a modern mind steeped in liberal ideology. Nietzsche argued unblinkingly for the elite among the elite. Because of democracy and Judeo-Christian morals, the strong are now ashamed of their strength and begin to seek reasons for their prominence rather than asserting it unhesitatingly. The whole morality of Europe is based upon the values which are useful only to the herd. The formula for societal decay is that the virtues proper to the herd infecting the leaders and breaking them into common clay. Nietzsche also advocates the rearing of a class of supermen to rule the society. The superman is a superior individual rising out of mass mediocrity by deliberate breeding and careful nurture. They must have good birth in a noble family. Intellect alone does not enable and an element of heredity is also accounted for. They are to be subjected to severe schooling where perfection will be extracted as a matter of course. A man so born and bred would be beyond good and evil. Other people should serve the superman. For Nietzsche, war is an admirable remedy for peoples that are growing weak. War and universal military service are the antidotes to democratic effeminacy. No wonder he was anathema to the progressive mind of the twentieth century.

A great drawback of the book is that it is confined to Western philosophy with not even an aerial survey of Indian and Chinese philosophical systems. This is especially jarring as the author finds Indian influence in Spinoza’s remarks such as ‘the greatest good is the knowledge of the union which the mind has with the whole nature’. The misogyny of the reputed philosophers will surprise modern readers. Schopenhauer’s conviction that the most distinguished intellects among the whole [feminine] sex have never managed to produce a single achievement in the fine arts that is really genuine and original; or given to the world any work of permanent value in any sphere (p.343) is a representative sample written in the latter half of nineteenth century. The author also tries to train the readers in properly appreciating philosophy. You should not read a book of philosophy all at once, but in small portions at many sittings. And having finished it, consider that you have begun to understand it. Read then some commentary. Finally, read the book again which will feel like a new one. When you’ve finished it, you will remain forever a lover of philosophy (p.170).

Durant has followed as witty a narrative as a book of philosophy can afford. However, I don’t claim that I enjoyed it, though it is equally true that I don’t repent it either. Such books mark a milestone in your reading life rather than providing a quick dose of fleeting pleasure. I regard completing this great work the same as my ‘conquest’ of Arnold Toynbee’s ‘A Study of History’ in eleven volumes (reviewed earlier). This particular volume was especially difficult with its very small typeface for the main text and the still smaller quotes and foot notes.

The book is highly recommended for serious readers.

Rating: 4 Star