Details
| Size | | Length: | 316 pages | | Height: | 9.8 in | | Width: | 5.3 in | | Thickness: | 1.2 in | | Weight: | 20.0 oz |
Industry Reviews
Adopting "a naturalist and scientistic standpoint" rather than staying "neutral," Bunge (Finding Philosophy in Social Science, Yale Univ., 1996) claims to define only philosophical terms of "enduring value," to shun "trendy" terms, and to avoid "solemnity" so as to "lighten, not burden" his listener. All that not only significantly limits the range of this dictionary but lends it an air of dogmatism. Although Bunge offers some correct and useful definitions (especially of terms in logic), his writing is so far from clear and the work so marred by numerous sloppy and incorrect definitions (e.g., defining "ambiguity" as denoting more than one object when the issue is whether one can tell which use is meant from the context, contradictions in defining "a priori/a posteriori" and "hypothesis") that, on the whole, this dictionary fails to come close to the many fine works already available. Avoid it! Instead, rely on Robert Audi's The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (LJ 7/95), Simon Blackburn's The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (LJ 11/1/94), and Ted Honderich's The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (LJ 7/95). Robert Hoffman, York Coll., CUNY
Fox
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
All rights reserved.
