Spinoza's Ethics, written in Euclid's geometric way, is a set of axiomatic formulas, from which various philosophical propositions, proofs, inferences and explanations have emerged. Once I crustily skin of head and read a page, I made an enemy with Spinoza. The same situation was repeated later in Critique of Pure Reason.
Russell's History of Western Philosophy is too personal to be evaluated by many people, which is not as objective and comprehensive as Hegel's Lecture Notes on the History of Philosophy, but the author's English essay writing is just to my liking. Kant said that every important philosophical problem can be explained by two completely opposite viewpoints and completely equal possibilities. Locke said that a true sign of love for truth is that "you have no confidence except the proof on which this claim is based", so the attitude of preaching at every turn lacks the spirit of love for truth. We should sympathize with each other's ignorance and use all gentle and decent persuasion to get rid of this ignorance-these are all things I can nod like a woodpecker.
When Russell started talking about Kan Kan, philosophy began to lose its formidable face. From Plato, Augustine, Aquinas to Descartes, rationalism comes down in one continuous line. Ambitious philosophers try to explain the ultimate mystery of the universe perfectly by establishing a self-explanatory system. Ever since we climbed out of the chaos of the deified world, mankind has been looking for those answers. History has turned a page, and generations of philosophers have gone wave after wave. They are rational, eloquent and logical, although sometimes they are overbearing and biased ... they have been arguing in the history of philosophy until the end of the world. I occasionally stop to digest their thoughts in the daily fatigue of horses and chariots, just trying to find some meaning for my life.
Life is almost exhausting. My curiosity about the history of philosophy is utilitarian from the beginning. I want to know what logic philosophers use to support their powerful hearts. Maybe I can find a compromise as a weapon against life in the future. Reading brings a lot of excitement and restlessness, as well as detachment and calm. Like every beginner who blindly pursues reading pleasure, the wisdom condensed in the form of proverbs in the book is full of appeal to me. But how easy they are to get, how easy they are to lose; I always get carried away, thinking that I have understood them, only to find that they are taken away by reality at the same rapid speed ... What keeps me firmly in control is still all kinds of annoying desires and inertia.
Nevertheless, this shallow philosophical education convinced me that even the humblest life is rooted in some profound and broad existence. In the cycle of time and space, the single life of each individual is weak, but the desire for infinity is the most powerful fetter in the depths of human soul. That kind of longing occasionally enters people's daily experience (although few people will always remind themselves of its existence), which brings me a little hope and maybe some changes. ..... For ordinary people, this is probably the whole value of philosophy.
I should say that I am very grateful to him. It is by looking at his philosophical history that the broad framework of philosophical development is clear in my mind. Compared with the history of philosophy compiled by some people in China, his history of philosophy can be said to be a real philosophy. Personally, I think: philosophy is a thing that needs purity, as Schopenhauer said: philosophy is not a prostitute, but a virgin. If you want to kiss her, you don't have to kiss you. However, our domestic philosophers have added too many wrong explanations in the history of philosophy, especially ideological explanations. For a beginner, adding too many non-philosophical things and constantly emphasizing these rubbish will inevitably blind the wisdom of philosophy itself and the great enlightenment of philosophy history itself.
Therefore, I admire Russell's clear, coherent and rigorous thinking. Russell deserves to be a mathematician. He studies philosophy as seriously as he studies science, which shows that his thinking and argumentation are fine. Besides, his doubts about knowledge and his fair attitude towards philosophy are the most admirable. For any great philosophical point of view, he always puts himself in the position of an ordinary person and does not forget to criticize them with common sense. For the understanding of philosophy itself, he always stands in the position of a humanist and is impartial.
However, on the other hand, I also want to talk about the major defects in Russell's history of western philosophy as I understand it. This defect comes from Russell's philosophy itself, that is, his analytical positivism philosophy. In the history of his philosophy, he almost denied all the emotional philosophers. The first one was Rousseau, who thought Rousseau was the source of ideological evil. Then, the great Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Heidegger were successively denied by him. Especially for Nietzsche, it is simply cynicism and there is no lack of personal attacks. He only prefers rational and empirical philosophers, such as Hume and Marx. Therefore, beginners of philosophy must be vigilant and always read critically.
At the same time, it also gives an inspiration, which is another most important gain from reading this history of philosophy. In other words, since Russell is so great, he doesn't understand the philosophy of emotion, let alone the world. No wonder the world is so depressing.
Of course, we should not blame the author for this. Although this book has such a big defect, it is not the author's own bad intention, but is determined by his personal philosophical system, and there is no way. And the advantages I mentioned earlier are enough to make his philosophy history one of the greatest.
Finally, I want to end this article by extracting a classic sentence he said to philosophy: the significance of philosophical exploration is not to give a final and definitive answer to this uncertain world, but to let us live in uncertainty and certainty.