For many years I have searched for a book that would classify the entire range of thought of the great philosophers - that is, a sort of map that would define the scope of the philosophical terrain. This book does exactly that. In fact, Watson suggests that this scheme may be applied to any written work - including literature, poetry, etc.

Walter Watson expands on the work of philosopher Richard McKeon in classifying the thought systems created by the great philosophers. Watson's scheme identifies four 'variables' - Perspective, Reality (i.e. metaphysics), (epistemological) Method, and Principle. For each variable he identifies four possible values. He identifies:

- Personal, Objective, Diaphanic, and Disciplinary Perspectives

- Existential, Substrative, Noumenal, and Essential Realities

- Agonistic, Logistic, Dialectical, and Problematic Methods

- Creative, Elemental, Comprehensive, and Reflexive Principles

This method of classification is defended by numerous examples and quotes from a wide variety of philosophers. Finally, Watson relates the four variables and the four values of each variable to Aristotle's four causes.

Watson does not promote or disparage any of the classes. His writing is clear and descriptive, but not evaluative. If he has a bias, it certainly is not apparent in his writing.

After reading this book, I can also recommend you continue with the companion work "Philosophy in World Perspective" by David A. Dilworth (also available from Amazon.com). Dilworth applies Watson's scheme of classification to many of the world's great thinkers - including the pre-Socratic Greeks, Eastern philosophers, 20th-century thinkers, and the major world religions.

Watson's book is presumably targeted at professional philosophers. I did not have trouble understanding most of the material, although I am not a philosopher, nor have I had any formal education in the subject. Dilworth's book does assume that his reader also has read widely in philosophy and I found it necessary to supplement his book with reading of a dictionary of philosophy and religion.

. . .who wishes to understand the perspective of Peter Abelard.

Peter Abelard is possibly one of the most misunderstood theologians of the entire High Middle Ages. Unfortunately, he is primarily remembered for his love affair with his equally brillian student Heloise -- and the fearsome revenge exacted upon him by her angry uncle.

It is unfair to remember only this! Abelard was a brilliant theologian and a brilliant teacher at one of the most renowned universities of his day (the University of Paris).

Sic et Non, arguably Abelard's greatest work, is his demonstration (much to the chagrin of the ecclesiastical authorities of his day) that the Early Church Fathers did NOT agree on all issues, and that it was possible (indeed, quite easy) to use the Fathers to argue against the Fathers.

It grieves me that more scholarly attention is not given to Abelard.