10-Point Rating: (8.75)
One of the claims of the analytical school of western philosophy is that math is reducible to logic, specifically the logic of groups, classes, or sets. In this vein, I can think of no better introduction than Russell's Principles of Mathematics. Although many of the ideas he proposes are intellectually outdated, Russell's method is rigorous and his presentation is lucid. While this book is not for everyone, no serious student of mathematical foundations should be without it. The chapters on zero and the concept of continuity are especially insightful.

He doesn't do much theorem proving, but he tackles
head on all the basic problem of mathematics that were known
a hundred years ago. It was how well he did everything
that makes this still a must read if you love mathematics.
There is actually only one equation in his book that I can think of:
and it is of a Clifford geometry measure! This man was a mathematician's
mathematician and a metamathematics master in the language of
philosophy as well! The pages are falling out and I still
go to this and Sommerville when I want inspiration or understanding of really hard issues.

An essential reading for every student of Philosophy of Mathematics.

I would give 5 stars to Russell's essays but 3 stars to this edition.
This edition contains most of the important/technical papers that russel wrote & are still worth reading for any serious philosophy student. The editor did a great job at selection but his snobbish introductory essays prefacing each russell essay is a complete waste of space & (your) time. The editor should have but didn't bother to update the logical symbols in the 1st russell essay, 'logic of relations', with the result that it would be incomprehensible even to people trained in symbolic logic.
'philosophy of logical atomism', for me anyway, helps me understand wittgenstein's Tractatus, which was otherwise incomprehsible to me.
I didn't make it through 'on denoting'. Who would really care about this important but by now mainly historical essay if you have already learned quantification theory & description theory?

This book reproduces Russell's famous article 'On Denoting' that appeared in "Mind" in 1905. It provides the earliest account of his theory of descriptions that was later developed in principia mathematica and 'improved' by W.V Quine. (It is however, a dog to read!) It is truly a fundamental work in logical analysis and I recommend it to you all.

Anybody interested in Viennese culture before World War I and between the wars ought to read this book. It portrays the atmosphere of a city that was one of the most influential centers of European culture, where contributions by the Jewish community were epoch-making and masterful. A must for anybody wanting to understand the marvel that was Europe.

Ah, Schnitzler. That magnificent chronicler of old Imperial Vienna - the Vienna of sweet young things (usually working- or middle-class), slightly neurotic but charming young men (usually upper-class), and their fleeting love-affairs, terminated so easily once ennui starts to exceed pleasure, the Vienna of walks in the Prater and talks in the cafes (ever so full of interesting artistic types), the Vienna where the nostalgic strains of Johann Strauss provide a suitably bittersweet accompaniment to the beginning (or the ending) of the abovementioned love-affairs ...

All of which occur in The Road into the Open; nevertheless, the Vienna depicted here does not only consist of only the sweetened tableaux so frequently dismissively (and unfairly) attributed to Schnitzler. The easy charm of the Vienna here is extant, but by no means idealised - it masks the artistic impotence that seems to afflict nearly all of its inhabitants, haunted as they are by the sense of being epigonal; grandiose artistic projects are continually being talked about, but never executed, whether because of an aversion to actually setting them down on paper, or simply because of what is commonly called a "lack of inspiration". More sinisterly, it also masks the habitual anti-Semitism of what one of the characters wittily calls those of "indigenous physiognomy"; though written in 1908, there are passages that almost foreshadow the rise of Nazism. Schnitzler subtly intertwines the study of the individual with ruthlessly objective social commentary and evocation of the atmosphere (both artistic and political) of fin de siecle Vienna, to produce a fascinating book highly recommended not only for those with an interest in the period, but also for anyone who fancies a thought-provoking book

I found this book very well-written and full of information about the history of marriage, sexual ethics, and morals. Bertrand, in his usual style, examines the social problems of his time and why they exist. This book was written in 1929, but is still logical and modern in thinking. Bertrand wittily and cynically speaks out against the restrictive dogmas of sex and love: ?It would seem that it is only with the introduction of the patriarchal system that men came to desire virginity in their brides. Where the matrilineal system exists young women sow their wild oats as freely as young men, but this could not be tolerated when it became of great importance to persuade women that all intercourse outside of marriage is wicked.? I strongly recommend this book for anyone doing a research paper on love, marriage, or sexual ethics. If you?re looking for something to make you think, it?s also a great book. I give it four out of five stars.

At first blush it looked like Russell wrote this book after having an extra-marital affair!

Just like an explicit answer to the problem of free will, any prescription on sexual ethics run the risk of being very wrong - it's perhaps one of the greatest ironies with homosapiens that while they themselves will not always avoid adultry, they will never tolerate it in case of their partner.

But even then the proposition that infidelity in marriages, since it cant be elliminated, should be tolerated is not a feasible solution not only from purely moral view point but also when human character is viewed in the light of evolutionary biology - men will not tolerate it because they will end up investing in others' offspring, and women because they will loose social and material resources to raise theirs.

Our capacity to form moral judgement (as on pre- , post-marital sex) developed much later than when we developed the strategies for reproductive success. It remains this constant struggle between our morality and our nature that will continue to trouble all those who concern themselves to give, or have, an explicit answer.

Perhaps the answer is in that immortal line of Forester (_African Queen_): "Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we were put on this earth to rise above."

That aside, despite being written eighty years ago it's still a good book especially for readers from oriental part of this world where one can't discuss sexual ethics without being termed immoral.

Read it if you have not read on this topic. (...)

It's hard not to cheer when you realize Russell wrote so forward-thinking a piece in the late '20s. Its ideas are still being debated today, especially in light of the recent trend toward opting out of conventional, legally bound marriages in Western countries. As a married man myself, I found Russell's condemnation of conventional sexual morality quite convincing. He doesn't advocate immature hedonism, nor does he pardon all infidelity. He actually favors marriage when children are involved. He simply rocks the foundation of marriage on Christian asceticism ('fornication is sin') and the need for certain paternity. He gives an anthropological & historical perspective on the issue that is broader than anything you're likely to hear in current debates.

My only complaint with this otherwise provocative & well-reasoned work is that some of his commentary borders on anti-Catholic. I'm not Catholic myself, but I couldn't help but wonder whether some of his persistent jabs at the Church weren't motivated by a prejudice common at that time. That isn't to say he doesn't critique Protestant morality as well, but he seems to take inordinate glee in poking the Vatican.

Once upon a time, long long ago there was a group of people that believed that mathematics could be completely reduced to just a study of logic. One of the principal members of this group was Bertrand Russell (who along with Alfred North Whitehead wrote the almost incomprehendable Principia Mathematica). Jump ahead 20 years when there entered men like Godel who showed that the entire endevour was doomed for failure.

This is a text written before that fateful discovery, and as such does not have the benefit of the Incompleteness Theorem to flesh out the ideas. As such, most of the material is wanting, at best, to the contemporary reader of mathematics. Adding to this the fact that the communication of mathematical ideas has tremendously changed in the intervening years, and the result is a text that, though one day had great significance, today seems like a much faded phtotgraph from a by-gone era.

Maybe this makes the text interesting in itself. However, those readers that wish for a current look at mathematical thought, and an introduction to the philosophy of mathematics may be best served by looking elsewhere.

This book is important for revealing Russell's views, at a certain point in his career, on the philosphies of mathematics and logic. But it says little on other philosophical viewpoints (even if only to criticise them). It might be better titled now 'Introduction to a Mathematical Philosophy (Called Logicism)'. We can hardly blame Russell for not knowing about the later developments of the subject (especially Godel), but it is worth bearing in mind that the book was written before some very important discoveries.

Like anything Russell wrote, it is a pleasure to read - his writing style is wonderful, and quite extraordinary when one realises how quickly he wrote this book (in prison, too!), but I suspect that for many readers the mathematical content will prove a little tricky to grasp.

As a historical document, it is fascinating; as an introduction to mathematical philosophy it is too narrow-minded for 1999.

A magnificent, fantastic and very readable introduction to the highly abstract world of formal logic and the foundations of mathematics. Lord Russell is not only one of the greatest logicians of all time, but he is also an astonishing writer, blessed with an elegant, heavenly precise concision of style and sharpness of argumentation.

An excellent short introduction to the philosophy of logical atomism. The lectures should be read along with Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Russell's logical atomism differs significantly from Wittgenstein's version of the theory but both share certain key features which make the theory distinctive. Those who enjoy "mathematical Philosophy" will not be disappointed.

This brief work serves as a fine introduction to the academic Russell for those curious about what distinguishes him among philosophers of the twentieth century and/or for those chiefly familiar with his "popular" works, such as "Why I Am Not a Christian" and "Marriage and Morals."

While Philosophy of Logical Atomism certainly does not cover his academic philosophy in depth, and it contains a number of points that he later amended (this is true of much of his academic philosophy), it is a good starting point for the Russell initiate as he can be a very difficult read in other academic texts.

The Theory of Descriptions and the Theory of Types are both presented here. The Theory of Descriptions in its "indefinite" and "definite" form (as opposed to its presence as only the Definite Theory of Descriptions in Principia Mathematica).

Anyone with a serious interest in analytical philosophy should be familiar with this material, and at the very least, the Philosophy of Logical Atomism will defintely tell you who wrote Waverly.

Bertrand Russell's Power is very ambitious in scope. Support for his thesis that the taming of power should be of chief concern to thinking people (his favorite audience in the three Russell books I've read) includes support from references to ancient China, medieval Europe, Machiavelli, the American businessman, the rise of the Catholic Church, American reverence for the Constitution, causes of the Protestant Reformation, ancient Greece and Rome and their governments, and more. As is to be expected of Lord Russell, his writing is an edifying, entertaining glimpse into the mind of a genius.

Russell's descriptions of the motivations behind power seeking individuals and organizations, the appeal of leaders, types of power and the basis for authority are compelling. The means for acquiring and exercising power are described by Russell in a systematic, conspiratorial manner. By understanding its appeal and the methods by which it is attained, Russell argues, mankind can hope to tame power. I felt that in this book Russell sought to deliver a "world-view" a la Karl Marx, whose communist ideas were based on the belief that the source of conflict in the world was man's alienation. With a twist, Russell might say that man's (and man's organizations, which he grants develop an organic life of their own) grasping for power is the chief cause of pain, stifled freedom, and stunted progress.

It's important to keep in mind that this book was first published in 1938 - though it's not hard to do while reading since Russell continuously warns of an impending great war. He refers to WWI as the "War" and an imminent WWII as the "Great War." I think, perhaps, the great motivation for writing it may have been to explain the rise of despotic and totalitarian governments during the era preceding its publication. A defining quote is:

"No other organization rouses anything like the loyalty aroused by the national State. And the chief activity of the State is preparation for large-scale homicide. It is loyalty to this organization for death that causes men to endure the totalitarian State, and to risk the destruction of home and children and our whole civilization rather than submit to alien rule."

Russell is my favorite philosopher and I'm planning to read many more of his books. I strongly recommend his History of Western Philosophy and The Conquest of Happiness. Russell wrote so many books on such a wide variety of subjects. My qualms with Power are its over ambitious reach, the frenetic pace of the writing and Russell's disdain for business and economics. Enjoy!

If you want to see behaviour for what it really is, this is worth reading. I gave it four stars instead of three because of the incredible effort B. Russell put into the book. Much of the writing is heavily opinionated but well reasoned. The thinking ties in well with Machiovelli (14th century?) who wrote "The Prince", a thinly veiled "story" describing the raw mechanics of political power. If you want to recognize power in modern politics, read Noam Chomsky, "The Common Good" or most anything else Chomsky writes. A couple of books that I prefer more than B. Russell's recognize power as a dynamic. They are "Escape From Evil" by Ernest Becker and "Kinds of Power" by James Hillman.

Defiant Teens: A Clinician's Manual for Assessment and Family Intervention is a very practical book for clinician's who work with teens with behavior disorders. It combines the best elements of behavioral therapy without ignoring the crucial role the family plays in treatment.

The book begins by presenting a comprehensive model for teen behavior, which includes discussion of mental disorders, parenting, and developmental factors. Then it describes instructions for 18 structured sessions that are used to treat the family and adolescent. It includes handouts, which may be reproduced if you buy the book.

I have used this book in practice as a substance abuse counselor in a correctional facility and found it to be very useful. It is a valuable resource for anyone working with difficult to treat teens and their families.

The best part of this book is that it is written like a workbook. Unlike many books on the matter, it includes step-by-step instructions that are grounded in theory without putting you to sleep. The handouts and session descriptions can be adapted and added to a clinician's toolbox. I would recommend this book to anyone who treats adolescents.

The definition of philosophy varies according to the philosophy we adopt, says Russell. So then --- there are some general problems which people find interesting, and which do not belong to any of the special sciences, and these problems raise doubts about what we consider knowledge. The definition and exploration of this problems is philosophy. With this introduction, Russell discusses some problems: the physical world, man from without (environment), man from within (consciousness, emotions, ethics etc) and so on. An outline is clearly limited, and Russell does not include many branches of philosophical enquiry such as metaphysical inquiry and some aspects of authority and state. But within its constraints, the book is still a good read.

This book was written by a panel of scholars who cumulate PhDs in physics, philosophy and theology, and are more of the "liberal" trend (either evolutionists, Neotheist, Postmodern...). The different essays present a variety of views, but are highly speculative. I do not want to question the value of these scholars, I just think that they have to speculate so much because we know so little about Chaos theory or Quantum Mechanics.
The book is anyway a worthy attempt, given that unclear fields such as Chaos Theory or Quantum Mech. belong as much to physics as to Theology or to Philosophy. All interpretations seem possible.

An important study for our entrance into an age unfettered by a religious system repressing scientific progress, moving toward the merging of science and new religious study.