What do you think?
Rate this book
The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas that Have Shaped Our World View
"[This] magnificent critical survey, with its inherent respect for both the 'West's mainstream high culture' and the 'radically changi ng world' of the 1990s, offers a new breakthrough for lay and scholarly readers alike...Allows readers to grasp the big picture of Western culture for the first time".--
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
Here are the great minds of Western civilization and their pivotal ideas, from Plato to Hegel, from Augustine to Nietzsche, from Copernicus to Freud. Richard Tarnas performs the near-miracle of describing profound philosophical concepts simply but without simplifying them. Ten years in the making and already hailed as a classic, THE PASSION OF THE WESTERN MIND is truly a complete liberal education in a single volume.
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
Here are the great minds of Western civilization and their pivotal ideas, from Plato to Hegel, from Augustine to Nietzsche, from Copernicus to Freud. Richard Tarnas performs the near-miracle of describing profound philosophical concepts simply but without simplifying them. Ten years in the making and already hailed as a classic, THE PASSION OF THE WESTERN MIND is truly a complete liberal education in a single volume.
560 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1991
About the author
Richard Tarnas
15 books145 followersRichard Theodore Tarnas (born February 21, 1950) is a cultural historian known for his books The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas That Have Shaped Our World View and Cosmos and Psyche: Intimations of a New World View. Tarnas is professor of philosophy and psychology at the California Institute of Integral Studies, and is the founding director of its graduate program in Philosophy, Cosmology, and Consciousness.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 194 reviews
June 19, 2013
I really can’t remember how this book ended up on my to-read shelf. As I recently wanted to read a book on the history of thought like that of Bertrand Russell’s History of Western Philosophy, I picked this up since it is relatively recent and thus it would give an idea of some modern schools of thought like those of Postmodernism and Deconstructionism, something Russell’s book lacked since it is written in 1945.
As a history of western thought, this book is excellent. I would highly recommend it if you are seeking to understand how the modern mind developed from the Greeks all the way to the present era. It is erudite and beautifully written. The author is extremely intelligent and observant (up to a point anyway) that I was aghast at the thought trajectories he cleverly traced and by which he connected thinkers from diverse periods and contexts with one another.
However, as the book drew to its end, I became more and more surprised by the claims Tarnas started making. What these boil down to is that it is inconceivable that the world we live in is materialistic and without meaning. Why it is inconceivable we are unfortunately not told. Also, he believes that our mere understanding of the world implies that there is meaning in it and the subject-object duality (separation between us as observers and the world) is an illusion. That how someone who wrote a history of western thought (including empiricism) that is so eloquent and perceptive is making such insupportable claims is really beyond me. Consider for example the following excerpt:
" Why do these myths ever work? If the human mind has no access to a priori certain truth, and if all observations are always already saturated by uncertified assumptions about the world, how could this mind possibly conceive a genuinely successful theory? Popper answered this question by saying that, in the end, it is “luck”—but this answer has never satisfied. For why should the imagination of a stranger ever be able to conceive merely from within itself a myth that works so splendidly in the empirical world that whole civilizations can be built on it (as with Newton)? How can something come from nothing?
I believe there is only one plausible answer to this riddle, and it is an answer suggested by the participatory epistemological framework outlined above: namely, that the bold conjectures and myths that the human mind produces in its quest for knowledge ultimately come from something far deeper than a purely human source. "
This is certainly amazing, especially if you read what he had to say about Galileo, Kepler and Newton in his rendering of some of their mistakes resulting from their flawed assumptions and worldviews, let alone Popper's notion that whenever a theory is non-falsifiable it is outside the purview of science. This certainly is the most peculiar author I came across. I read in incredulity the extraordinary claim he made that the modern materialist scientific worldview (which supposes that humanity may very well be an accident that is very likely not to occur if we rewind and replay the tape) is, wait for it, anthropomorphic since it presupposes that the human mind can understand the Cosmos in a mechanistic framework, whereas the participatory epistemological framework (outlined in the excerpt agove) is not anthropomorphic at all (!!!). I really, really kid you not.
As a history of western thought, this book is excellent. I would highly recommend it if you are seeking to understand how the modern mind developed from the Greeks all the way to the present era. It is erudite and beautifully written. The author is extremely intelligent and observant (up to a point anyway) that I was aghast at the thought trajectories he cleverly traced and by which he connected thinkers from diverse periods and contexts with one another.
However, as the book drew to its end, I became more and more surprised by the claims Tarnas started making. What these boil down to is that it is inconceivable that the world we live in is materialistic and without meaning. Why it is inconceivable we are unfortunately not told. Also, he believes that our mere understanding of the world implies that there is meaning in it and the subject-object duality (separation between us as observers and the world) is an illusion. That how someone who wrote a history of western thought (including empiricism) that is so eloquent and perceptive is making such insupportable claims is really beyond me. Consider for example the following excerpt:
" Why do these myths ever work? If the human mind has no access to a priori certain truth, and if all observations are always already saturated by uncertified assumptions about the world, how could this mind possibly conceive a genuinely successful theory? Popper answered this question by saying that, in the end, it is “luck”—but this answer has never satisfied. For why should the imagination of a stranger ever be able to conceive merely from within itself a myth that works so splendidly in the empirical world that whole civilizations can be built on it (as with Newton)? How can something come from nothing?
I believe there is only one plausible answer to this riddle, and it is an answer suggested by the participatory epistemological framework outlined above: namely, that the bold conjectures and myths that the human mind produces in its quest for knowledge ultimately come from something far deeper than a purely human source. "
This is certainly amazing, especially if you read what he had to say about Galileo, Kepler and Newton in his rendering of some of their mistakes resulting from their flawed assumptions and worldviews, let alone Popper's notion that whenever a theory is non-falsifiable it is outside the purview of science. This certainly is the most peculiar author I came across. I read in incredulity the extraordinary claim he made that the modern materialist scientific worldview (which supposes that humanity may very well be an accident that is very likely not to occur if we rewind and replay the tape) is, wait for it, anthropomorphic since it presupposes that the human mind can understand the Cosmos in a mechanistic framework, whereas the participatory epistemological framework (outlined in the excerpt agove) is not anthropomorphic at all (!!!). I really, really kid you not.
December 18, 2015
For a book that describes itself as one the encompasses the Ideas that Have Shaped Our World View, there was very little mention of the roles women played. I took a class with the author, and when we brought up the invisibility of women in history, and in his book, he became defensive and told us we had an "allergy" towards him...still not sure what that means. As he explained throughout the three day course, he understands what it means to be a woman because he's experienced childbirth during LSD and breathwork trances. I have never met anyone who was so neatly able to usurp the role of women,(he says he felt the pain of childbirth in the crowning of the birth of the world) while at the same time, misunderstand our experience so completely. He was utterly clueless in regard to how offensive his assumptions of what it means to be a woman.
March 9, 2016
This is a very important, well written and dense treatise about the history of ideas in Western Civilization.
The author manages to condense, in a single book, all the major stepping stones of the intellectual history of the West, and he manages to achieve this result without seriously compromising on depth and accuracy.
The great drama of the evolution of the Western Mind is described passionately and in a gripping and enjoyable book, where the critical concepts and world-views, as expressed by the major philosopher throughout history, are beautifully expressed in a concise but scholarly valuable way. Remarkable.
Let me highlight some of the points made by the author that I found particularly worth discussing:
- The author remarks that the birth of philosophy in ancient Greece did not happen in a vacuum, significantly owing to the cultural substrate existing at the time (where the mythological structure of the Olympian world presented the Universe as an ordered and structured whole, a cosmos rather than a chaos, where the natural and the human world are not distinguishable domains).
In particular, Hellenic culture attained a delicate and fertile balance between the ancient mythological tradition and a more “modern” secular rationalism. The temples to Zeus, Athena and Apollo are clearly a celebration of mathematical elegance and human rationality as much as a celebration of the divine.
- The author manages to express the beauty and complexity of Plato's philosophical system, stressing how for Plato the ultimate reality is not only rational and mathematical in nature, but also profoundly aesthetic. In Plato, the Good, the True and the Beautiful are united. In this, Plato represents the pinnacle of the unique synthesis of "eros" and "logos" – of passion (love of wisdom), and rational mind. For Plato (and for most of the ancient Greek philosophers), the direct apprehension of the world' deeper reality satisfies not only the mind but also the soul.
- The Greek fundamental concept of “logos” (that incredibly beautiful and quintessentially Greek concept representing mind, reason, intellect, organizing principle, word, wisdom and meaning) is also nicely explained as developed and enriched in history by the Western philosophical thought.
- Finally, here we have one author who does not follow the politically correct current trend of negating the important part played by the legacy of the Classical Era in the subsequent evolution of the Western Mind and of the Western World, which ultimately was one of the causes and enablers of the revolutionary developments of the Scientific Revolution and Industrial Revolution. It is good to see an author who is not scared to stress the uniqueness of Western intellectual thought and civilization, and its debt to the Classical World legacy - even if he correctly recognizes the also very important contribution of the Eastern Civilizations to the formation of the Greek civilization.
- Neo-Platonism is briefly explained by the author, who recognizes that it became the final expression of classical Pagan philosophy. Unfortunately, I must say that here I was disappointed by the lack of depth with which the author treats the amazingly beautiful and very important philosophical system of Plotinus, system which left a very important intellectual legacy influencing, directly or indirectly, many subsequent important Western systems of thought (including Christianity).
- No sufficient recognition is given by the author to the intellectual developments of the Roman Civilization which, while being substantially influenced by the Greek Civilization, nevertheless (and contrary to what many may think) actually did develop its own peculiar and unique culture.
- The author beautifully conveys the inner tensions between the different ideologies, approaches and world-views of what is called “Christianity”, which has never been a monolithic system of thought. The great tension between the Judaic and the Hellenistic legacies of the Christian Creed is compellingly highlighted.
The intimacy between the “Hellenistic” side of Christianity and (Neo)Platonism is clearly highlighted: after all, Augustine regarded Plato's thought as the “most pure and bright in all philosophy” and he also posited that the Platonic Forms existed within the creative mind of God. On the other hand, while God was seen by the Hellenic Christian perspective as the universal Mind, the Logos, the Neoplatonic One, the Judaic conception leaned towards a jealous, almost capricious, almost nationalistic, completely transcendent entity to be feared as much as loved.
The Hellenic Christian God was quite different to the Judaic God promising a political victory for "Israel" and the physical destruction of the political enemies of the Judaic State.
- I really liked how the author highlights how the Christian world view, even in its most “medieval” form, was not as simple or one-sided as many may think. And the great scholastic awakening which happened in the late Middle Ages is a testament to this, as represented in its most magnificent form by the intellectual quest of Thomas Aquinas.
The greatness of the intellectual synthesis accomplished by Aquinas is beautifully expressed by the author. I also like how the author dispels the myth that Aquinas' philosophical system is purely Aristotelian in character: Aquinas quintessentially Neoplatonic notion of participation in “being” is an example of the influence of Neoplatonism in Aquinas thought.
- The author very nicely demonstrates how the “Neoplatonist mathematics, added to the rationalism and nascent empiricism of the late Scholastics, provided one of the final components necessary for the emergence of the Scientific Revolution.”
It was Copernicus and Kepler's tenacious Neoplatonic faith that the Universe was regulated and structured according to simple, elegant and beautiful mathematical forms that allowed them to go beyond any form of naïve empiricism and trigger the Scientific Revolution.
- The extremely important role played by the Classical Legacy (and in particular, Neoplatonism) in the explosion of the Renaissance intellectual revolution is nicely explained. The multifaceted complexity of this period is also conveyed very effectively.
- I really enjoyed how the author lucidly and compellingly explains, without trying to be politically correct, the profoundly contradictory and ambivalent character of the “Reformation” triggered by Luther. The Reformation was as much a reactionary counter-revolution against the relaxed cultural syncretism displayed by the Renaissance Church's embrace of the Classical pagan culture, as it was a quest for the Church purification (undoubtedly needed at the time) and return to its "pure" roots.
It was the Reformation which was pushing for a literal, word-by-word interpretation of the Scripture, which was pushing for a Bible-based Christianity ontologically dualistic and very pessimistic in relation to the rational capabilities of the human mind. It was first Protestants who initially reacted almost violently against the Copernican world-view revolution.
But, on the other hand, the focus on the individual freedom from institutional constraints, and the breach of the monolithic, potentially suffocating spiritual an intellectual power of the Church, proved in the longer term very positive developments for the evolution of the modern Western Mind.
- Jumping now to more modern philosophers, I did like how the author explains the Cartesian-Kantian thought revolution. However I am not sure that I fully agree with some aspects of the author's interpretation of the Kantian thought, in particular I think that the stress on Kant's subjectivism is not warranted. I also think that the author should really have explained the absolutely critical Kantian concept of “synthetic a-priori”, without which the Kantian system cannot really be fully appreciated.
-The Romantic sensibility is nicely explained in its important philosophical implications, and I really liked how the author manages to highlight the most important features of Hegelian's thought. Hegel has been always misunderstood and underestimated in the post-modern thought, and the author renders him justice.
- On the other hand, I disagree with the author's view of post-modern existentialism, which the author perceives as being profoundly pessimistic. I actually think that this is a profoundly misguided perspective of existentialism, whose main message is, in my opinion, profoundly optimistic and liberating, a deeply Promethean cry for the power of man to choose, to radically self-define and create the meaning of himself and his own role in the Universe: “existence precedes essence”.
- I also profoundly disagree with the author's myopic view of the aims and character of the scientific inquiry: the author has a quite restricted and one-sided view of the scientific enterprise, which he tends to see as a purely quantitative, reductionistic and reductive approach to the understand of the Universe, and as such not spiritually fulfilling.
This is simply NOT what science is about: science is as much about an holistic, passionate approach to the understanding of the Universe as it is about a rigorous and structured approach based on mathematical consistency and experimental accuracy and confirmation. The author probably never took the time to read the likes of Penrose, Bohm, Wheeler, Davies, Einstein or Feynman. Unfortunately, and sadly, this is an attitude that can be seen in many individuals who had an education only in the so-called humanities and who had never been seriously exposed to the beauty of mathematics and of the sciences on general, and who simply do not understand them.
- Finally, the author believes that the missing key in the philosophical quest can be found in depth psychology and the exploration of the unconscious. He uses Freud and Jung as compelling examples and he also believes we have to “embrace the feminine in all its various forms” as well as ecological, mystic, and other counter cultural and multicultural perspectives.
Well, to be honest I find this mumble-jumble, out-of-the-70's, LSD-driven approach deeply unsatisfactory and obsolete (Freud in particular has been discredited and even within the psychologists confraternity his views are not widely popular either).
Overall, it is a really important, provocative, insightful book worth reading and well deserving a 4 stars. Highly recommended.
The author manages to condense, in a single book, all the major stepping stones of the intellectual history of the West, and he manages to achieve this result without seriously compromising on depth and accuracy.
The great drama of the evolution of the Western Mind is described passionately and in a gripping and enjoyable book, where the critical concepts and world-views, as expressed by the major philosopher throughout history, are beautifully expressed in a concise but scholarly valuable way. Remarkable.
Let me highlight some of the points made by the author that I found particularly worth discussing:
- The author remarks that the birth of philosophy in ancient Greece did not happen in a vacuum, significantly owing to the cultural substrate existing at the time (where the mythological structure of the Olympian world presented the Universe as an ordered and structured whole, a cosmos rather than a chaos, where the natural and the human world are not distinguishable domains).
In particular, Hellenic culture attained a delicate and fertile balance between the ancient mythological tradition and a more “modern” secular rationalism. The temples to Zeus, Athena and Apollo are clearly a celebration of mathematical elegance and human rationality as much as a celebration of the divine.
- The author manages to express the beauty and complexity of Plato's philosophical system, stressing how for Plato the ultimate reality is not only rational and mathematical in nature, but also profoundly aesthetic. In Plato, the Good, the True and the Beautiful are united. In this, Plato represents the pinnacle of the unique synthesis of "eros" and "logos" – of passion (love of wisdom), and rational mind. For Plato (and for most of the ancient Greek philosophers), the direct apprehension of the world' deeper reality satisfies not only the mind but also the soul.
- The Greek fundamental concept of “logos” (that incredibly beautiful and quintessentially Greek concept representing mind, reason, intellect, organizing principle, word, wisdom and meaning) is also nicely explained as developed and enriched in history by the Western philosophical thought.
- Finally, here we have one author who does not follow the politically correct current trend of negating the important part played by the legacy of the Classical Era in the subsequent evolution of the Western Mind and of the Western World, which ultimately was one of the causes and enablers of the revolutionary developments of the Scientific Revolution and Industrial Revolution. It is good to see an author who is not scared to stress the uniqueness of Western intellectual thought and civilization, and its debt to the Classical World legacy - even if he correctly recognizes the also very important contribution of the Eastern Civilizations to the formation of the Greek civilization.
- Neo-Platonism is briefly explained by the author, who recognizes that it became the final expression of classical Pagan philosophy. Unfortunately, I must say that here I was disappointed by the lack of depth with which the author treats the amazingly beautiful and very important philosophical system of Plotinus, system which left a very important intellectual legacy influencing, directly or indirectly, many subsequent important Western systems of thought (including Christianity).
- No sufficient recognition is given by the author to the intellectual developments of the Roman Civilization which, while being substantially influenced by the Greek Civilization, nevertheless (and contrary to what many may think) actually did develop its own peculiar and unique culture.
- The author beautifully conveys the inner tensions between the different ideologies, approaches and world-views of what is called “Christianity”, which has never been a monolithic system of thought. The great tension between the Judaic and the Hellenistic legacies of the Christian Creed is compellingly highlighted.
The intimacy between the “Hellenistic” side of Christianity and (Neo)Platonism is clearly highlighted: after all, Augustine regarded Plato's thought as the “most pure and bright in all philosophy” and he also posited that the Platonic Forms existed within the creative mind of God. On the other hand, while God was seen by the Hellenic Christian perspective as the universal Mind, the Logos, the Neoplatonic One, the Judaic conception leaned towards a jealous, almost capricious, almost nationalistic, completely transcendent entity to be feared as much as loved.
The Hellenic Christian God was quite different to the Judaic God promising a political victory for "Israel" and the physical destruction of the political enemies of the Judaic State.
- I really liked how the author highlights how the Christian world view, even in its most “medieval” form, was not as simple or one-sided as many may think. And the great scholastic awakening which happened in the late Middle Ages is a testament to this, as represented in its most magnificent form by the intellectual quest of Thomas Aquinas.
The greatness of the intellectual synthesis accomplished by Aquinas is beautifully expressed by the author. I also like how the author dispels the myth that Aquinas' philosophical system is purely Aristotelian in character: Aquinas quintessentially Neoplatonic notion of participation in “being” is an example of the influence of Neoplatonism in Aquinas thought.
- The author very nicely demonstrates how the “Neoplatonist mathematics, added to the rationalism and nascent empiricism of the late Scholastics, provided one of the final components necessary for the emergence of the Scientific Revolution.”
It was Copernicus and Kepler's tenacious Neoplatonic faith that the Universe was regulated and structured according to simple, elegant and beautiful mathematical forms that allowed them to go beyond any form of naïve empiricism and trigger the Scientific Revolution.
- The extremely important role played by the Classical Legacy (and in particular, Neoplatonism) in the explosion of the Renaissance intellectual revolution is nicely explained. The multifaceted complexity of this period is also conveyed very effectively.
- I really enjoyed how the author lucidly and compellingly explains, without trying to be politically correct, the profoundly contradictory and ambivalent character of the “Reformation” triggered by Luther. The Reformation was as much a reactionary counter-revolution against the relaxed cultural syncretism displayed by the Renaissance Church's embrace of the Classical pagan culture, as it was a quest for the Church purification (undoubtedly needed at the time) and return to its "pure" roots.
It was the Reformation which was pushing for a literal, word-by-word interpretation of the Scripture, which was pushing for a Bible-based Christianity ontologically dualistic and very pessimistic in relation to the rational capabilities of the human mind. It was first Protestants who initially reacted almost violently against the Copernican world-view revolution.
But, on the other hand, the focus on the individual freedom from institutional constraints, and the breach of the monolithic, potentially suffocating spiritual an intellectual power of the Church, proved in the longer term very positive developments for the evolution of the modern Western Mind.
- Jumping now to more modern philosophers, I did like how the author explains the Cartesian-Kantian thought revolution. However I am not sure that I fully agree with some aspects of the author's interpretation of the Kantian thought, in particular I think that the stress on Kant's subjectivism is not warranted. I also think that the author should really have explained the absolutely critical Kantian concept of “synthetic a-priori”, without which the Kantian system cannot really be fully appreciated.
-The Romantic sensibility is nicely explained in its important philosophical implications, and I really liked how the author manages to highlight the most important features of Hegelian's thought. Hegel has been always misunderstood and underestimated in the post-modern thought, and the author renders him justice.
- On the other hand, I disagree with the author's view of post-modern existentialism, which the author perceives as being profoundly pessimistic. I actually think that this is a profoundly misguided perspective of existentialism, whose main message is, in my opinion, profoundly optimistic and liberating, a deeply Promethean cry for the power of man to choose, to radically self-define and create the meaning of himself and his own role in the Universe: “existence precedes essence”.
- I also profoundly disagree with the author's myopic view of the aims and character of the scientific inquiry: the author has a quite restricted and one-sided view of the scientific enterprise, which he tends to see as a purely quantitative, reductionistic and reductive approach to the understand of the Universe, and as such not spiritually fulfilling.
This is simply NOT what science is about: science is as much about an holistic, passionate approach to the understanding of the Universe as it is about a rigorous and structured approach based on mathematical consistency and experimental accuracy and confirmation. The author probably never took the time to read the likes of Penrose, Bohm, Wheeler, Davies, Einstein or Feynman. Unfortunately, and sadly, this is an attitude that can be seen in many individuals who had an education only in the so-called humanities and who had never been seriously exposed to the beauty of mathematics and of the sciences on general, and who simply do not understand them.
- Finally, the author believes that the missing key in the philosophical quest can be found in depth psychology and the exploration of the unconscious. He uses Freud and Jung as compelling examples and he also believes we have to “embrace the feminine in all its various forms” as well as ecological, mystic, and other counter cultural and multicultural perspectives.
Well, to be honest I find this mumble-jumble, out-of-the-70's, LSD-driven approach deeply unsatisfactory and obsolete (Freud in particular has been discredited and even within the psychologists confraternity his views are not widely popular either).
Overall, it is a really important, provocative, insightful book worth reading and well deserving a 4 stars. Highly recommended.
May 9, 2012
التحديث الأول:
بالأمس بدأت به، لا ثقة بالكتاب بل ثقة باسم الدار الناشرة له، وأجده كتاب جيد جداً ولا زلت في البداية، عرّفني على إجابات كانت تشكل علي مثل علاقة تعدد الآلهة عند الإغريق بالجواهر المفردة لدى أفلاطون.
لكن بالطبع لا نسّلم لمؤرخ غربي يتحدث عن الغرب ولابد من تذكر قوة تأثير المركزية الغربية فيهم .
توقفت عن كتاب زكريا ابراهيم حتى أحصل على نسخة خاصة أتمكن من خلالها أن أعيث بالكتاب تخطيطاً وتعليقاً.
التحديث الأخير :
آلا العقل الغربي
ريتشارد تارناس
" آلام العقل الغربي" لا تتوقع أن تجد في الكتاب آلاماً بشكل كامل إلا في نهايته تقريباً عند الحديث عن ( ما بعد الحداثة )، أما الكتاب فلا أنكر أنه أجبرني على تركه أكثر من مرة بسبب التبجيل، والانحياز للمركزية الغربية، وكأن العالم هو ( الغرب ) ! وأن ميزان البشرية وتحرك التاريخ من أجل وبسبب الغرب! هذا خاطر لابد من قوله لترتاح نفسي قليلاً زاعمة الإقدام على التحدث بشيء من التجرد.
الكتاب ينقسم إلى سبعة أقسام، بدأ بمقدمة، فالقسم الاول متحدثاً عن الفلسفة الإغريقية وما قبلها، و رؤى أفلاطون، التي أرى أنها محورية في كثير من أقسام الكتاب حتى القسم الأخير، فللتيسير وربط الأفكار أقترح أن يتم فهم رؤية أفلاطون، و أرسطو بشكل واضح وبيّن، ثم الإمساك بالكتاب وقراءته.
تحدث عن نقطة مهمة حول علاقة عالم المثل لدى أفلاطون، بتعدد الآلهة لدى الإغريق، وانتقال التعدد إلى جواهر، والجواهر إلى مثل، فالشكل واحد لأشياء خارج العالم تتحكم بالعالم وبالإنسان، ولكل جوهر وظيفته ومعناه الخاص
بالإضافة إلى نقطة محورية أخرى وهي النظرة الكونية أو النظر إلى الكون، والانقلابات القوية منذ الفلسفة الإغريقية حتى العصر الحديث بناءً على تلك النظرة، مروراً بالعصر الوسيط ( المسيحية ).
القسم الثاني تحدث فيه عن تحول الحقبة الكلاسيكية
والثالث تحدث فيه عن النظرة المسيحية إلى العالم بكل تقلباتها، ومواقفها من التراث الإغريقي، والتنظيمات السياسية وغيرها.
في الجزء الرابع تحدث عن المدرسية المسيحية وأثرها في العلوم؟
والجزء الخامس تحدث فيه عن النظرة الحديثة إلى العالم، من خلال النهضة والإصلاح الديني والثورة العلمية، ومحورية النظرة إلى الكون، ودعوى القدرة على المعرفة الكاملة.
الجزء السادس تحدث فيه : عن الآلام ، ومن هنا نستطيع أن نسميه كتاب الآلام، وعن الشك حتى في العلم وفي التجريبية مع هيوم، وصولاً إلى ما بعد الحداثة والعدمية البائسة.
ثم الجزء السابع كذيل لكل ما مر من فصول وتعضيده برؤى معينة.
الكتاب جميل حقيقة، وفيه فوائد نفيسة، وإن كان يحتاج منا للتفطن لمدى حضور النظرة المركزية الغربية الطاغية، وعدم الاستسلام لوصف التاريخ والعالم والمستقبل من ذلك المنظور لمؤلف غربي ذو قلب غربي .
هذا باختصار.
بالأمس بدأت به، لا ثقة بالكتاب بل ثقة باسم الدار الناشرة له، وأجده كتاب جيد جداً ولا زلت في البداية، عرّفني على إجابات كانت تشكل علي مثل علاقة تعدد الآلهة عند الإغريق بالجواهر المفردة لدى أفلاطون.
لكن بالطبع لا نسّلم لمؤرخ غربي يتحدث عن الغرب ولابد من تذكر قوة تأثير المركزية الغربية فيهم .
توقفت عن كتاب زكريا ابراهيم حتى أحصل على نسخة خاصة أتمكن من خلالها أن أعيث بالكتاب تخطيطاً وتعليقاً.
التحديث الأخير :
آلا العقل الغربي
ريتشارد تارناس
" آلام العقل الغربي" لا تتوقع أن تجد في الكتاب آلاماً بشكل كامل إلا في نهايته تقريباً عند الحديث عن ( ما بعد الحداثة )، أما الكتاب فلا أنكر أنه أجبرني على تركه أكثر من مرة بسبب التبجيل، والانحياز للمركزية الغربية، وكأن العالم هو ( الغرب ) ! وأن ميزان البشرية وتحرك التاريخ من أجل وبسبب الغرب! هذا خاطر لابد من قوله لترتاح نفسي قليلاً زاعمة الإقدام على التحدث بشيء من التجرد.
الكتاب ينقسم إلى سبعة أقسام، بدأ بمقدمة، فالقسم الاول متحدثاً عن الفلسفة الإغريقية وما قبلها، و رؤى أفلاطون، التي أرى أنها محورية في كثير من أقسام الكتاب حتى القسم الأخير، فللتيسير وربط الأفكار أقترح أن يتم فهم رؤية أفلاطون، و أرسطو بشكل واضح وبيّن، ثم الإمساك بالكتاب وقراءته.
تحدث عن نقطة مهمة حول علاقة عالم المثل لدى أفلاطون، بتعدد الآلهة لدى الإغريق، وانتقال التعدد إلى جواهر، والجواهر إلى مثل، فالشكل واحد لأشياء خارج العالم تتحكم بالعالم وبالإنسان، ولكل جوهر وظيفته ومعناه الخاص
بالإضافة إلى نقطة محورية أخرى وهي النظرة الكونية أو النظر إلى الكون، والانقلابات القوية منذ الفلسفة الإغريقية حتى العصر الحديث بناءً على تلك النظرة، مروراً بالعصر الوسيط ( المسيحية ).
القسم الثاني تحدث فيه عن تحول الحقبة الكلاسيكية
والثالث تحدث فيه عن النظرة المسيحية إلى العالم بكل تقلباتها، ومواقفها من التراث الإغريقي، والتنظيمات السياسية وغيرها.
في الجزء الرابع تحدث عن المدرسية المسيحية وأثرها في العلوم؟
والجزء الخامس تحدث فيه عن النظرة الحديثة إلى العالم، من خلال النهضة والإصلاح الديني والثورة العلمية، ومحورية النظرة إلى الكون، ودعوى القدرة على المعرفة الكاملة.
الجزء السادس تحدث فيه : عن الآلام ، ومن هنا نستطيع أن نسميه كتاب الآلام، وعن الشك حتى في العلم وفي التجريبية مع هيوم، وصولاً إلى ما بعد الحداثة والعدمية البائسة.
ثم الجزء السابع كذيل لكل ما مر من فصول وتعضيده برؤى معينة.
الكتاب جميل حقيقة، وفيه فوائد نفيسة، وإن كان يحتاج منا للتفطن لمدى حضور النظرة المركزية الغربية الطاغية، وعدم الاستسلام لوصف التاريخ والعالم والمستقبل من ذلك المنظور لمؤلف غربي ذو قلب غربي .
هذا باختصار.
December 22, 2010
This was a very interesting book about cultural philosophy. 95% of the book is a survey from Plato to Postmodernism. In the last 5% of the book, Tarnas uses the entire trajectory of western thought to present his reflections regarding the direction in which culture may be headed. Although my comprehension of what he describes remains incomplete, I'll attempt a brief review of only the epilogue:
Tarnas shows that the Scientific Enlightenment created a paradigm shift in the collective human psyche, which resulted in a disenchanted worldview and the modern characteristic of existential alienation. The inner tension between the quest for meaning and a cold impersonal world tends to lead to an entire spectrum of psychological distortions and disorders. The solution to the modern predicament is to be found in epistemology.
The counter cultural response to the Enlightenment was expressed by the Romantics who turned inward to discover the mysteries of life. Rather than relying on the scientific method, the Romantics placed more emphasis on the emotions, imagination, and intuition to explore a vast array of human experience. But it was the scientific mind that dominated the cultural paradigm.
Tarnas believes that the missing key in the philosophical quest can be found in depth psychology and the exploration of the unconscious. Drawing upon powerful psycho therapeutic methods that serve as catalysts to reveal the realms of the unconscious, Tarnas identifies numerous implications with respect to religion, psychology, and philosophy. But the most important implication has to do with epistemology. Particularly the subject-object dichotomy that has defined modernity.
According to Tarnas, the dualistic shift that began with Descartes and the Enlightenment was not just a fractured way of seeing the world nor the opposite of the Romantics, but rather an archetypal birth process in the evolution of the human mind. All of cultural history can be seen not just as random events, but an evolving process where every contraction and death provides for an expansion and birth; the mind participates in this archetypal process.
Modernity begins in a movement toward freedom and individualism, but inevitably evolves into existential alienation leading to a 'deconstructive frenzy'. Yet this existential crisis is necessary for new birth. This archetypal process found in culture and every aspect of nature is the same potentially unfolding process found within us.
Tarnas suggests that a very different epistemology is called for, which has its roots in thinkers like Goethe, Hegel, Schelling, Coleridge, Emerson, and Rudolph Steiner. What these thinkers have in common is the understanding that mankind's relationship to the cosmos is not dualistic, but participatory.
A participatory epistemology implies that these archetype processes within us are in fact an expression of nature itself. And it is through the inner life of the mind (using a plurality of faculties) that the deeper truths of nature can be revealed. Thus, the mystical experience is not just a private distorted experience of an isolated ego, but rather the emergence of nature herself, a direct intuitive apprehension of reality itself. Or in Tarnas' words, the "imaginal intuition is the human fulfillment of that reality's essential wholeness, which had been rent asunder by the dualistic perception."
Tarnas claims that this is not a regression to a naive participation mystique, but rather an evolution through dualistic alienation. It incorporates postmodern thought, but transcends it. "The human spirit of nature brings forth its own order through the human mind when that mind is employing its full complement of faculties - intellectual, volitional, emotional, sensory, imaginative, aesthetic, epiphanic. Then the world speaks its meaning through human consciousness."
Finally, Tarnas reflects on the past several decades, with its deconstruction of so many cultural components suggesting that a new birth is emerging. This new birth can be seen in the holistic approach now seen in nearly every field of study (social ecology, feminism, going green, alternative medicine, etc.). Culture is beginning to discover a more holistic ecological worldview that sees the interconnectivity among all living systems and that the mechanical worldview may turn out to be an ironic projection of man's alienated condition.
Last, Tarnas shows how this trajectory of the Western mind "has been driven by a heroic impulse to forge an autonomous rational human self by separating itself from the primordial unity with nature." To achieve this, the Western mind has repressed the feminine. Western culture tends to be characterized by rationalism, masculinity, individualism, contractual relationships, colonialism, capitalism, imperialism, and science. It is an imbalance. Eastern culture (that has not been westernized) has been the counter balance to the west. It’s characteristics tend to be collective, passive, intuitive, feminine, and mystical.
Tarnas believes it is time to embrace the feminine in all its various forms as well as ecological, archaic, and other countercultural and multicultural perspectives. The social and environmental problems we now face are rooted in dominatory political and social systems. The hope for western culture is a synthesis between the east and west, mysticism and science. When the masculine is balanced with the feminine, not only are they complimentary to each other, but the balance also enables each to transcend themselves.
Tarnas shows that the Scientific Enlightenment created a paradigm shift in the collective human psyche, which resulted in a disenchanted worldview and the modern characteristic of existential alienation. The inner tension between the quest for meaning and a cold impersonal world tends to lead to an entire spectrum of psychological distortions and disorders. The solution to the modern predicament is to be found in epistemology.
The counter cultural response to the Enlightenment was expressed by the Romantics who turned inward to discover the mysteries of life. Rather than relying on the scientific method, the Romantics placed more emphasis on the emotions, imagination, and intuition to explore a vast array of human experience. But it was the scientific mind that dominated the cultural paradigm.
Tarnas believes that the missing key in the philosophical quest can be found in depth psychology and the exploration of the unconscious. Drawing upon powerful psycho therapeutic methods that serve as catalysts to reveal the realms of the unconscious, Tarnas identifies numerous implications with respect to religion, psychology, and philosophy. But the most important implication has to do with epistemology. Particularly the subject-object dichotomy that has defined modernity.
According to Tarnas, the dualistic shift that began with Descartes and the Enlightenment was not just a fractured way of seeing the world nor the opposite of the Romantics, but rather an archetypal birth process in the evolution of the human mind. All of cultural history can be seen not just as random events, but an evolving process where every contraction and death provides for an expansion and birth; the mind participates in this archetypal process.
Modernity begins in a movement toward freedom and individualism, but inevitably evolves into existential alienation leading to a 'deconstructive frenzy'. Yet this existential crisis is necessary for new birth. This archetypal process found in culture and every aspect of nature is the same potentially unfolding process found within us.
Tarnas suggests that a very different epistemology is called for, which has its roots in thinkers like Goethe, Hegel, Schelling, Coleridge, Emerson, and Rudolph Steiner. What these thinkers have in common is the understanding that mankind's relationship to the cosmos is not dualistic, but participatory.
A participatory epistemology implies that these archetype processes within us are in fact an expression of nature itself. And it is through the inner life of the mind (using a plurality of faculties) that the deeper truths of nature can be revealed. Thus, the mystical experience is not just a private distorted experience of an isolated ego, but rather the emergence of nature herself, a direct intuitive apprehension of reality itself. Or in Tarnas' words, the "imaginal intuition is the human fulfillment of that reality's essential wholeness, which had been rent asunder by the dualistic perception."
Tarnas claims that this is not a regression to a naive participation mystique, but rather an evolution through dualistic alienation. It incorporates postmodern thought, but transcends it. "The human spirit of nature brings forth its own order through the human mind when that mind is employing its full complement of faculties - intellectual, volitional, emotional, sensory, imaginative, aesthetic, epiphanic. Then the world speaks its meaning through human consciousness."
Finally, Tarnas reflects on the past several decades, with its deconstruction of so many cultural components suggesting that a new birth is emerging. This new birth can be seen in the holistic approach now seen in nearly every field of study (social ecology, feminism, going green, alternative medicine, etc.). Culture is beginning to discover a more holistic ecological worldview that sees the interconnectivity among all living systems and that the mechanical worldview may turn out to be an ironic projection of man's alienated condition.
Last, Tarnas shows how this trajectory of the Western mind "has been driven by a heroic impulse to forge an autonomous rational human self by separating itself from the primordial unity with nature." To achieve this, the Western mind has repressed the feminine. Western culture tends to be characterized by rationalism, masculinity, individualism, contractual relationships, colonialism, capitalism, imperialism, and science. It is an imbalance. Eastern culture (that has not been westernized) has been the counter balance to the west. It’s characteristics tend to be collective, passive, intuitive, feminine, and mystical.
Tarnas believes it is time to embrace the feminine in all its various forms as well as ecological, archaic, and other countercultural and multicultural perspectives. The social and environmental problems we now face are rooted in dominatory political and social systems. The hope for western culture is a synthesis between the east and west, mysticism and science. When the masculine is balanced with the feminine, not only are they complimentary to each other, but the balance also enables each to transcend themselves.
February 25, 2015
The subject matter is fascinating. I can't say the same thing for Tarnas' writing style, however. Tarnas seems to think his book is a game of Scrabble. But you don't win points with readers when you employ unnecessary extended metaphors every other page, write the same thing over and over in different ways, and use complicated words when simpler ones would suffice. With a good editor, this book could be condensed into a more readable form- one that allows the average person to engage the material a bit better. That said, the material itself is interesting, and Tarnas does make good points here. I just wish I didn't have to plow through a pile of sludge to get to them.
March 21, 2015
Nine-tenths or so of this book is a very conventional, albeit prolix, survey of the history of philosophical thinking in the West from the pre-Socratics to the present. As a brief introduction to the history of ideas it is to be recommended. Even the wordy repetitiveness of Tarnas' exposition may function as an aid to retention and understanding for beginners.
Having devoted decades to such studies myself, I found most of the book to be a rehash of familiar ideas and would never have gone through the whole thing were it not given me as a gift by a distant friend I'll be seeing soon. As it was, however, I did have the satisfaction of finding its very familiarity a confirmation that I have obtained a decent philosophical education. Furthermore, I had the satisfaction of seeing some of my own judgments (my prejudices), such as regards the vital centrality of Kant, reinforced by the author.
What surprised me was the emphasis that Tarnas puts on C.G. Jung. Again, I had the satisfaction of reading his claim that Jung was a thoroughgoing Kantian, the very topic of my textually definitive master's thesis on that topic. But beyond that Tarnas goes further than I would, seeing Jung as propounding a synthesis and resolution of conflicting worldviews much as Kant (at least temporarily, as he puts it) reconciled the physical sciences to ethics and religion.
Tarnas doesn't so much focus on Jung, though, as he does on the psychotherapist Stanislas Grof, seen substantially in terms of Jungian archetype theory. Here, building on a weak foundation, a conceptual structure is built in the last tenth of the book which I found unsupportable.
Basically, the idea is that we, in this 'post-Modern' era, are alienated from the world, that, in fact, the history of philosophy is a history of successive alienations via the thought of such figures as Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, Kant, Nietzsche and Darwin, all of whom overturned old certainties while attempting to posit new models of understanding. In other words, its the old (simplistic and, according to Walter Kaufmann, unfair) Hegelian three-step of thesis/antithesis/synthesis-at-a-higher level. Jung and Grof, to Tarnas' thinking, offer the next step in this evolution toward the Absolute with the archetypes of birth and the feminine.
Here Tarnas gets too fuzzy for me to appreciate his thinking. First of all, neither Jung nor Grof were/are philosophers. Second, archetype theory itself is (like, admittedly, Kant's table of categories), in its detail (the shadow, the anima/us, the wise old man, the puer aeternas, the Self and so on indefinitely), poorly evidenced, some of the archetypes having more, some much less, evidential basis, some of them having more, some much less, logical necessity, some of them having more, some much less, biological correlation. Grof, he tells us, offers the ultimate achetype, 'ultimate' for this era at least, in the rediscovery of what Otto Rank called 'the birth trauma'--the progressive from uterine bliss, to the trauma of passing through the birth canal, to the awakening in the greater world. Here one isn't sure if Tarnas wants his readers to believe that one can actually remember the experience, an outrageous claim on the face of it, or is he's simply offering a metaphor which Grof, his clients and Tarnas himself have found to be fruitful. If it's just a metaphor, fine, fuzzy as it is, especially as Tarnas doesn't go into the fundamental difference between birthing-as-a-mother and being birthed, irrespective of gender--a difference one would expect to be emphasized given the weight he gives otherwise to gender differences. But that, very weak interpretation isn't clearly distinguished from the stronger, existential one that we, all of us, collectively and at the very core of our experience, KNOW its truth.
Where he is stronger, as regards Jung-think applied to civilization and its discontents, is in reference to Jung's observation that the universe becomes conscious in us. That makes some sense, but he hardly develops the idea, spending much more time with Grof's birth business than with Jung's rather commonplace, but potentially profound, observation (some of the implications of which are explored by Heidegger and other phenomenologists hardly even mentioned in the text.
Still, all my objections to Tarnas' concluding fuzziness aside, the bulk of this book is a worthy introduction to the history of philosophy in the West...
Having devoted decades to such studies myself, I found most of the book to be a rehash of familiar ideas and would never have gone through the whole thing were it not given me as a gift by a distant friend I'll be seeing soon. As it was, however, I did have the satisfaction of finding its very familiarity a confirmation that I have obtained a decent philosophical education. Furthermore, I had the satisfaction of seeing some of my own judgments (my prejudices), such as regards the vital centrality of Kant, reinforced by the author.
What surprised me was the emphasis that Tarnas puts on C.G. Jung. Again, I had the satisfaction of reading his claim that Jung was a thoroughgoing Kantian, the very topic of my textually definitive master's thesis on that topic. But beyond that Tarnas goes further than I would, seeing Jung as propounding a synthesis and resolution of conflicting worldviews much as Kant (at least temporarily, as he puts it) reconciled the physical sciences to ethics and religion.
Tarnas doesn't so much focus on Jung, though, as he does on the psychotherapist Stanislas Grof, seen substantially in terms of Jungian archetype theory. Here, building on a weak foundation, a conceptual structure is built in the last tenth of the book which I found unsupportable.
Basically, the idea is that we, in this 'post-Modern' era, are alienated from the world, that, in fact, the history of philosophy is a history of successive alienations via the thought of such figures as Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, Kant, Nietzsche and Darwin, all of whom overturned old certainties while attempting to posit new models of understanding. In other words, its the old (simplistic and, according to Walter Kaufmann, unfair) Hegelian three-step of thesis/antithesis/synthesis-at-a-higher level. Jung and Grof, to Tarnas' thinking, offer the next step in this evolution toward the Absolute with the archetypes of birth and the feminine.
Here Tarnas gets too fuzzy for me to appreciate his thinking. First of all, neither Jung nor Grof were/are philosophers. Second, archetype theory itself is (like, admittedly, Kant's table of categories), in its detail (the shadow, the anima/us, the wise old man, the puer aeternas, the Self and so on indefinitely), poorly evidenced, some of the archetypes having more, some much less, evidential basis, some of them having more, some much less, logical necessity, some of them having more, some much less, biological correlation. Grof, he tells us, offers the ultimate achetype, 'ultimate' for this era at least, in the rediscovery of what Otto Rank called 'the birth trauma'--the progressive from uterine bliss, to the trauma of passing through the birth canal, to the awakening in the greater world. Here one isn't sure if Tarnas wants his readers to believe that one can actually remember the experience, an outrageous claim on the face of it, or is he's simply offering a metaphor which Grof, his clients and Tarnas himself have found to be fruitful. If it's just a metaphor, fine, fuzzy as it is, especially as Tarnas doesn't go into the fundamental difference between birthing-as-a-mother and being birthed, irrespective of gender--a difference one would expect to be emphasized given the weight he gives otherwise to gender differences. But that, very weak interpretation isn't clearly distinguished from the stronger, existential one that we, all of us, collectively and at the very core of our experience, KNOW its truth.
Where he is stronger, as regards Jung-think applied to civilization and its discontents, is in reference to Jung's observation that the universe becomes conscious in us. That makes some sense, but he hardly develops the idea, spending much more time with Grof's birth business than with Jung's rather commonplace, but potentially profound, observation (some of the implications of which are explored by Heidegger and other phenomenologists hardly even mentioned in the text.
Still, all my objections to Tarnas' concluding fuzziness aside, the bulk of this book is a worthy introduction to the history of philosophy in the West...
August 30, 2016
Though this book was written in 1991, it still serves as an excellent analysis of the paralysis of the modern world. Richard Tarnas is primarily focused on philosophers and philosophy, but a glance at the present political situation reveals how strong the connection is between the loss of a common paradigm (or even two or three) and the confusion that confounds the global society.
Tarnas, though, grounds that grasp of the present in the intellectual traditions that shaped the modern world, and begins in ancient Greece. Though he is distilling numerous complex philosophical and religious views into a (relatively) few pages, he does so with grace and precision. His long analysis of Christian thought, and how it affected our ways of thinking, is excellent, and he also shows how the cracks in the iron theology of the middle ages allowed the light of the Renaissance to seep in.
And though his lining up the Copernican revolution (which removed man from the center of the cosmos), the Darwinian revolution (which removed man from the crown of creation), and the Freudian revolution (which removed reason as the master of humanity's future) is far from new, he clearly states the postmodern dilemmas, and makes it clear why it is so hard to reach consensus on any aspect of 21st century life.
Tarnas' semi-mystic embrace of Stanislav Grof's theory about how an infant's passage through the birth canal echoes the constrictions of our culture, and how human culture can be saved by the masculine domination of the past 5,000 years returning to the feminine (womb) that it left so long ago seems like the product of a few too many psychedelics, it cannot detract from Tarnas' achievement. And who knows? Maybe he's right, and maybe we will, as a culture, step back from the dangerous excesses of our male-dominated culture. As Leonard Cohen said, "I wish the women would hurry up and take over" -- and twenty years on from the publication of "The Passion of the Western Mind," I feel safe in saying Tarnas would agree.
Tarnas, though, grounds that grasp of the present in the intellectual traditions that shaped the modern world, and begins in ancient Greece. Though he is distilling numerous complex philosophical and religious views into a (relatively) few pages, he does so with grace and precision. His long analysis of Christian thought, and how it affected our ways of thinking, is excellent, and he also shows how the cracks in the iron theology of the middle ages allowed the light of the Renaissance to seep in.
And though his lining up the Copernican revolution (which removed man from the center of the cosmos), the Darwinian revolution (which removed man from the crown of creation), and the Freudian revolution (which removed reason as the master of humanity's future) is far from new, he clearly states the postmodern dilemmas, and makes it clear why it is so hard to reach consensus on any aspect of 21st century life.
Tarnas' semi-mystic embrace of Stanislav Grof's theory about how an infant's passage through the birth canal echoes the constrictions of our culture, and how human culture can be saved by the masculine domination of the past 5,000 years returning to the feminine (womb) that it left so long ago seems like the product of a few too many psychedelics, it cannot detract from Tarnas' achievement. And who knows? Maybe he's right, and maybe we will, as a culture, step back from the dangerous excesses of our male-dominated culture. As Leonard Cohen said, "I wish the women would hurry up and take over" -- and twenty years on from the publication of "The Passion of the Western Mind," I feel safe in saying Tarnas would agree.
November 18, 2023
The author had the ability to write the story of the development of understanding our place in the universe and how we fit in it as if he were writing a novel. The narrative flows that well. He's a very good writer.
The author steps the reader through the development of how we think about knowledge. The heavens above, the home of the Gods, are first thought of as perfect: universal, necessary, and certain. Overtime, through rational thought and coupling with experience we start to understand the world around us antithetically namely as particular to the data, contingent to our current understanding and never certain but probable.
I would recommend this book to anyone. Unfortunately, in that recommendation I would have to give a couple of caveats. He gives this bizarre extra place in our understanding of the world to Freud and Jung and he sprinkles it throught the whole text. It amazes me that we ever really got out of the 80s (yes, the book was published in 1993, but he thinks in 80s paradigms) with its non refutable pyshoanalytical thought and its archetypal forms ("I know you're repressed because you deny your own repression").
If the reader ignores the author's obvious bias towards pyschobabble, the reader will have one of the best written surveys of human thought and progression they'll ever read within one book.
The author steps the reader through the development of how we think about knowledge. The heavens above, the home of the Gods, are first thought of as perfect: universal, necessary, and certain. Overtime, through rational thought and coupling with experience we start to understand the world around us antithetically namely as particular to the data, contingent to our current understanding and never certain but probable.
I would recommend this book to anyone. Unfortunately, in that recommendation I would have to give a couple of caveats. He gives this bizarre extra place in our understanding of the world to Freud and Jung and he sprinkles it throught the whole text. It amazes me that we ever really got out of the 80s (yes, the book was published in 1993, but he thinks in 80s paradigms) with its non refutable pyshoanalytical thought and its archetypal forms ("I know you're repressed because you deny your own repression").
If the reader ignores the author's obvious bias towards pyschobabble, the reader will have one of the best written surveys of human thought and progression they'll ever read within one book.
April 30, 2016
كتب مهم جدا للمهتمين بتاريخ الفكر والفلسفة
موسوعي
ومحتاج اكتر من قراءة
موسوعي
ومحتاج اكتر من قراءة
December 1, 2016
Tarnas aptly delineates the trajectory of Western philosophy from the pre-Socratic era to postmodernism: a long laborious journey from Homer, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle (Greek era); to Jesus Christ, Paul, Augustine and Aquinas (Christian Medieval era); and then Copernicus, Descartes, Locke, Hume, Kant, Goethe, Hegel, Freud and Jung (Modern era); and finally a quick turn at Nietzsche and (Postmodernism). Of course, these figures are central; the narrative encompasses more. Yet it neglects other influential figures —some of my favorites— for brevity’s sake.
The style and structure of Tarnas’s narration is circular, repetitive and overlapping, with constant reiterations, summaries, and rewordings of issues and thinkers previously described. This helps immensely in imbibing central ideas and developments in the course of history. The wording is often literary—sometimes even “poetic” and metaphorical; nothing like scientific dryness: this will sure keep any reader engaged.
An important thing to note is that in the section, “The Transformation of the Medieval Era”, the narrative becomes too eclectic, drawing forth from different figures in a synoptic integrative fashion. Hence, Tarnas here does not elaborate thoroughly on some philosophers and contributions. Nietzsche’s influence, for example, is not delineated fully, and so is the case for other individuals. In addition, other important thinkers are overlooked, like Henry Bergson and Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Anyway, this book serves as an indispensible primer that will make branching out and zooming in for deeper study on specific figures or periods more congenial. I highly recommend it for those new to philosophy or just want to get a wholistic overview of western thought.
The style and structure of Tarnas’s narration is circular, repetitive and overlapping, with constant reiterations, summaries, and rewordings of issues and thinkers previously described. This helps immensely in imbibing central ideas and developments in the course of history. The wording is often literary—sometimes even “poetic” and metaphorical; nothing like scientific dryness: this will sure keep any reader engaged.
An important thing to note is that in the section, “The Transformation of the Medieval Era”, the narrative becomes too eclectic, drawing forth from different figures in a synoptic integrative fashion. Hence, Tarnas here does not elaborate thoroughly on some philosophers and contributions. Nietzsche’s influence, for example, is not delineated fully, and so is the case for other individuals. In addition, other important thinkers are overlooked, like Henry Bergson and Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Anyway, this book serves as an indispensible primer that will make branching out and zooming in for deeper study on specific figures or periods more congenial. I highly recommend it for those new to philosophy or just want to get a wholistic overview of western thought.
June 11, 2022
كتاب مهم اساءت له الترجمة في كثير من أجزائه، وفي رأيي لا يصلح كمقدمة لتاريخ الفلسفة، فالبرغم من أن الكتاب تصمن بالفعل استعراض تاريخي للفكر الغربي الفلسفي، ولكنه جاء كضرورة لخدمة الموضوع الرئيسي للكتاب ألا وهو تأثير تلك الأفكار ونتائجها، ولذلك يفضل لقاريء الكتاب معرفة عامة بتطور الفكر الفلسفي الغربي حتى يستفيد أقصى إفادة من الكتاب.
الكتاب جاء متسلسلا، منتقلا إنتقالا منطقيا وزمنيا سلسا لا يشعرك بالإنفصال، كما أن الكاتب كانت له إضاءات مهمة عن الفترة المسيحية وتناقاضاتها الداخلية، ولا يخفى على أي قاريء أن الكاتب متأثر تأثرا عميقا لا حد له بالجدل الهبجلي الذي يرى أنه سينتهي بنا إلى غاية نهائية تتضح فيها كل الحقائق عبر تجلي(الروح المطلق) أو الحقيقة الكلية في الطبيعة وإدراكه عبر الوعي الإنساني.
أخيرا، لا أرى سببا مقنعا واحدا لترجمة كلمة (passions) بالآلام! .... فهذه الكلمة لا تستخدم بمعنى (الآلام) إلا في حالة واحدة فقط الا وهي الإطار اللاهوتي لوصف آلام وعذابات المسيح المصلوب والنصوص الدينية الواصفة لهذه الآلام.
الكتاب جاء متسلسلا، منتقلا إنتقالا منطقيا وزمنيا سلسا لا يشعرك بالإنفصال، كما أن الكاتب كانت له إضاءات مهمة عن الفترة المسيحية وتناقاضاتها الداخلية، ولا يخفى على أي قاريء أن الكاتب متأثر تأثرا عميقا لا حد له بالجدل الهبجلي الذي يرى أنه سينتهي بنا إلى غاية نهائية تتضح فيها كل الحقائق عبر تجلي(الروح المطلق) أو الحقيقة الكلية في الطبيعة وإدراكه عبر الوعي الإنساني.
أخيرا، لا أرى سببا مقنعا واحدا لترجمة كلمة (passions) بالآلام! .... فهذه الكلمة لا تستخدم بمعنى (الآلام) إلا في حالة واحدة فقط الا وهي الإطار اللاهوتي لوصف آلام وعذابات المسيح المصلوب والنصوص الدينية الواصفة لهذه الآلام.
March 8, 2014
I am glad I read this book, but, woo, am I glad I'm done with it. It took me 6 weeks to read and was very intellectually challenging. It is a very well-done history of Western thought, just at the right level for me. It gets a little depressing when he gets to the post-modern era. Bottom line: after centuries of the best minds trying to understand ourselves and the world we live in, we can know nothing with certainty. Then the epilogue gets kind of woo-woo, with the hypothesis that our collective consciousness is the co-creator of reality. Definitely don't read this book if you are a religious fundamentalist or if you love certainty for some other reason. But if you are intellectually curious, it is like a vigorous walk in a mental garden.
May 11, 2020
بعد قراءة هذا الکتاب نحمد اللە علی نعمة الوحی و بلاغ الدین الینا و حفظە من الضیاع،الکتاب هی معانات و آلام الانسان البعید عن توجیهات الوحی و البعد عن الهدایة السماء المتعثر فی ضلال الدنیوی
June 25, 2022
4.5. This book is truly a liberal (Classical liberalism not Leftist liberalism) education in a single volume. I understand it was part of the curriculum for several university courses and I can see why. The book traces the Western world view from the early days of ancient Greece through the Middle Ages and up to our current postermodernist insanity (my word). The book elicits the feeling of traveling throughout history following a single thread that explains how one Epoch or zeitgeist impacted the next (for better or worse).
I struggled a bit through the first few chapters. Even though I was familiar at a high level with many of the Greek concepts (i.e. Plato’s Forms) some took longer to wrap my head around (i.e. Aristotle’s potentiality and actuality). This book is definitely not a fast read. Seemed like most pages are replete with deep and abstract concepts.
I really enjoyed reading about some of my favorite philosphers and great thinkers and where they fit into the overarching arc of history. I had recently read books from both Goethe and Jung and had no clue that Jung had been so influenced by Goethe and German Romanticism.
The book left me with so many mixed feelings. I felt exultant reading about the inspired discoveries that opened new vistas for mankind. I also felt despair as the world left behind a more innocent, humble and simple perspective and became more secular. The events throughout history that brought about the death of God and loss of faith were in many ways simultaneously commendable and regrettable (“God became an unnecessary hypothesis”). In the early days of Christianity mankind was humble and life was full of meaning and purpose. It was also tragically obsessed with guilt and desperately proving one’s worthiness for the assurance of rescue from perdition because of the fall. Even during the reformation Luther had hearkened back to Augustine’s mindest and viewed any act of human will (other than worshipping God) as sinful just in varying degrees. This mindset devalued life on this earth and was the antithesis of Humanism. After God had been killed (Nietzsche) by events such as, among others, the discovery that the Earth was not the center but a just a spec in an inhuman vast Universe, that man was not special and apart from animals but evolved from apes, and that man is not even really in control of his thoughts (Freud, Jung) the West abandoned it’s Christianity (not completely obviously) and transitioned to a secular age. As I read and the transitioned unfolded, it was hard not to feel a yearning for the more spiritual, meaningful and simple times of the past. The upshot was obviously the shift away from superstitious belief (surprised how long Astrology was viewed as legitimate science) to illuminating light of reason, scientific advancement and the unbounded potential of man.
I was surprised by the many paradoxes throughout history. Especially how the goals of a viewpoint in one era would sow the seeds for it’s own destruction in another era. For example the ancient Greek Pythagorean-Plato mindset that there is some universal pattern and order in the Universe propelled later scientific thinkers (i.e. that the cosmos must move in a particular pattern) but those scientific advances led to rejecting the same ancient Greece concepts as viable explanations of the physical world. Similar with the Reformation. Luther’s goal was to reacquaint man to the more pure Christianity but by going against the massively powerful monolithic Catholic Church it opened the door to question authority and take a unique, individualistic stance which helped contribute to secularism. I enjoy the rationalism of Kant (at least of what I can understand) and admire his attempt to provide a way to look at the world in a rational, empirical way but also to pave a way for a rational mind to maintain a hope that a God could exist. That said, the byproduct of his views probably helped to pave the way to Radical Perspectivism (Nietzsche) and our postmodern world.
The book did not put forth a very optimistic always-advancing linear progression of history. Essentially with events such as new revolutionary scientific discoveries (Quantum Physics, Relativity) that gave credence to Kuhn’s concept that science is really just one paradigm winning over another (not necessarily better), the promise of the enlightenment devolved into our current madness of post modernism. Post modernism is the most ridiculous and dangerous viewpoint in history. More dangerous than Communism in my opinion. Essentially the claim is that there is no objective truth because one cannot perceive without subjective interpreting. This means that truth is really what those in power want it to be, nothing less or nothing more. The democracy and liberties, while not perfect, we enjoy in America are not based on a progression of enlightened ideals, inspiration or sound principles but just the colonialist self-serving sophistry of slave-owning old white European men. Moreover, capitalism and technological advancements might have brought an entire world out of poverty it is destroying the environment. When you compare the West’s progress to something like the pseudo-science (Popper) of Lysenkoism under Stalin by which tens of millions died of famine, post modernism looks pretty ridiculous. Steven Pinker, (I’d recommend his book Enlightenment Now) states:
"If scientific beliefs are just a particular culture’s mythology, how come we can cure smallpox and get to the moon, and traditional cultures cannot? And if truth is just socially constructed, would you say that climate change is a myth? It’s the same with moral values. If moral values are nothing but cultural customs, would you agree that our disapproval of slavery or racial discrimination or the oppression of women is just a western fancy?"
I was a bit surprised that the book didn’t really even gloss over Adam Smith and Capitalism (brief mention of Puritan Work Ethic) as well as how the Western ideals shaped modern democracies especially in America.
Common words/concepts to familiarize yourself with prior to reading:
Syncretism, immanent (not imminent), unitary, numinous, teleological, controvert, entailment, sine qua non, reify, vitiate, pluralistic, anthropomorphic, ontological, tautological, promethean, dialectic, Archimedean, Dionysian
I struggled a bit through the first few chapters. Even though I was familiar at a high level with many of the Greek concepts (i.e. Plato’s Forms) some took longer to wrap my head around (i.e. Aristotle’s potentiality and actuality). This book is definitely not a fast read. Seemed like most pages are replete with deep and abstract concepts.
I really enjoyed reading about some of my favorite philosphers and great thinkers and where they fit into the overarching arc of history. I had recently read books from both Goethe and Jung and had no clue that Jung had been so influenced by Goethe and German Romanticism.
The book left me with so many mixed feelings. I felt exultant reading about the inspired discoveries that opened new vistas for mankind. I also felt despair as the world left behind a more innocent, humble and simple perspective and became more secular. The events throughout history that brought about the death of God and loss of faith were in many ways simultaneously commendable and regrettable (“God became an unnecessary hypothesis”). In the early days of Christianity mankind was humble and life was full of meaning and purpose. It was also tragically obsessed with guilt and desperately proving one’s worthiness for the assurance of rescue from perdition because of the fall. Even during the reformation Luther had hearkened back to Augustine’s mindest and viewed any act of human will (other than worshipping God) as sinful just in varying degrees. This mindset devalued life on this earth and was the antithesis of Humanism. After God had been killed (Nietzsche) by events such as, among others, the discovery that the Earth was not the center but a just a spec in an inhuman vast Universe, that man was not special and apart from animals but evolved from apes, and that man is not even really in control of his thoughts (Freud, Jung) the West abandoned it’s Christianity (not completely obviously) and transitioned to a secular age. As I read and the transitioned unfolded, it was hard not to feel a yearning for the more spiritual, meaningful and simple times of the past. The upshot was obviously the shift away from superstitious belief (surprised how long Astrology was viewed as legitimate science) to illuminating light of reason, scientific advancement and the unbounded potential of man.
I was surprised by the many paradoxes throughout history. Especially how the goals of a viewpoint in one era would sow the seeds for it’s own destruction in another era. For example the ancient Greek Pythagorean-Plato mindset that there is some universal pattern and order in the Universe propelled later scientific thinkers (i.e. that the cosmos must move in a particular pattern) but those scientific advances led to rejecting the same ancient Greece concepts as viable explanations of the physical world. Similar with the Reformation. Luther’s goal was to reacquaint man to the more pure Christianity but by going against the massively powerful monolithic Catholic Church it opened the door to question authority and take a unique, individualistic stance which helped contribute to secularism. I enjoy the rationalism of Kant (at least of what I can understand) and admire his attempt to provide a way to look at the world in a rational, empirical way but also to pave a way for a rational mind to maintain a hope that a God could exist. That said, the byproduct of his views probably helped to pave the way to Radical Perspectivism (Nietzsche) and our postmodern world.
The book did not put forth a very optimistic always-advancing linear progression of history. Essentially with events such as new revolutionary scientific discoveries (Quantum Physics, Relativity) that gave credence to Kuhn’s concept that science is really just one paradigm winning over another (not necessarily better), the promise of the enlightenment devolved into our current madness of post modernism. Post modernism is the most ridiculous and dangerous viewpoint in history. More dangerous than Communism in my opinion. Essentially the claim is that there is no objective truth because one cannot perceive without subjective interpreting. This means that truth is really what those in power want it to be, nothing less or nothing more. The democracy and liberties, while not perfect, we enjoy in America are not based on a progression of enlightened ideals, inspiration or sound principles but just the colonialist self-serving sophistry of slave-owning old white European men. Moreover, capitalism and technological advancements might have brought an entire world out of poverty it is destroying the environment. When you compare the West’s progress to something like the pseudo-science (Popper) of Lysenkoism under Stalin by which tens of millions died of famine, post modernism looks pretty ridiculous. Steven Pinker, (I’d recommend his book Enlightenment Now) states:
"If scientific beliefs are just a particular culture’s mythology, how come we can cure smallpox and get to the moon, and traditional cultures cannot? And if truth is just socially constructed, would you say that climate change is a myth? It’s the same with moral values. If moral values are nothing but cultural customs, would you agree that our disapproval of slavery or racial discrimination or the oppression of women is just a western fancy?"
I was a bit surprised that the book didn’t really even gloss over Adam Smith and Capitalism (brief mention of Puritan Work Ethic) as well as how the Western ideals shaped modern democracies especially in America.
Common words/concepts to familiarize yourself with prior to reading:
Syncretism, immanent (not imminent), unitary, numinous, teleological, controvert, entailment, sine qua non, reify, vitiate, pluralistic, anthropomorphic, ontological, tautological, promethean, dialectic, Archimedean, Dionysian
May 15, 2013
Joseph Campbell called this book "the most lucid and concise presentation I have read of the grand lines...of Western thought." High praise from someone who would know! Tarnas' greatest achievement, to my mind, is the lucidity of his prose which makes this an enormously readable survey of the Western Mind from the Greeks to the Post Moderns.
Tarnas' objective for creating this opus is similar to what Campbell wished to do: that is, to create the possibility for an integration of all cultures and all peoples into a new holistic consciousness. In his Epilogue, he says that "[a]s the plant at a certain stage brings forth its blossom, so does the universe bring forth new stages of human knowledge." His effort in this book is to show the stages that have led up to where we are now, and to contribute to our discovery of the next stage.
This next stage largely involves synthesizing the masculine nature of Western philosophy and science with a feminine, holistic understanding of the unity of all living things. For Tarnas, doing this involves delving deep into consciousness, where we find that "the bold conjectures and myths that the human mind produces in its quest for knowledge ultimately come from something far deeper that a purely human source. They come from the wellspring of nature itself..."
One of our favorite things about this book is the way it builds upon itself. When Tarnas describes the ideas and influence of any particular philosopher, event, or innovation, he does so in such a way that he can refer to it again later on and you will understand the connections.
For example, in medieval times, scholars working within the Church -- the only institution capable of supporting scholars -- went through a transition in thought similar to the transition from Plato to Aristotle. Plato believed that truth took the form of otherworldly ideals, and that this world was but a poor reflection of them. Augustine seized upon this concept to reinforce the Christian emphasis on life after death. Plato was followed by Aristotle, who elevated the importance of this world and the importance of this life to the center of his philosophy, and something similar happened in Europe in the Middle Ages:
Anselm was the Archbishop of Canterbury who created Scholasticism, a means of dialectical reasoning that he used to prove the existence of God. He also openly opposed the Crusades, which means he was incredibly bold and defiantly compassionate. From here, and in the same snowballing, story-telling mode, Tarnas goes on to describe Thomas Aquinas in one of my favorite parts of the book.
Tarnas' objective for creating this opus is similar to what Campbell wished to do: that is, to create the possibility for an integration of all cultures and all peoples into a new holistic consciousness. In his Epilogue, he says that "[a]s the plant at a certain stage brings forth its blossom, so does the universe bring forth new stages of human knowledge." His effort in this book is to show the stages that have led up to where we are now, and to contribute to our discovery of the next stage.
This next stage largely involves synthesizing the masculine nature of Western philosophy and science with a feminine, holistic understanding of the unity of all living things. For Tarnas, doing this involves delving deep into consciousness, where we find that "the bold conjectures and myths that the human mind produces in its quest for knowledge ultimately come from something far deeper that a purely human source. They come from the wellspring of nature itself..."
One of our favorite things about this book is the way it builds upon itself. When Tarnas describes the ideas and influence of any particular philosopher, event, or innovation, he does so in such a way that he can refer to it again later on and you will understand the connections.
For example, in medieval times, scholars working within the Church -- the only institution capable of supporting scholars -- went through a transition in thought similar to the transition from Plato to Aristotle. Plato believed that truth took the form of otherworldly ideals, and that this world was but a poor reflection of them. Augustine seized upon this concept to reinforce the Christian emphasis on life after death. Plato was followed by Aristotle, who elevated the importance of this world and the importance of this life to the center of his philosophy, and something similar happened in Europe in the Middle Ages:
That shift was sparked in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries with the West's rediscovery of a large corpus of Aristotle's writings, preserved by the Moslems and Byzantines and now translated into Latin. With these texts, which included the Metaphysics, the Physics, and De Anima. (On the Soul), came not only learned Arabic commentaries, but also other works of Greek science, notably those of Ptolemy. Medieval Europe's sudden encounter with a sophisticated scientific cosmology, encyclopedic in breadth and intricately coherent, was dazzling to a culture that had been largely ignorant of these writings and ideas for centuries. Yet Aristotle had such extraordinary impact precisely because that culture was so well prepared to recognize the quality of his achievement. His masterly summation of scientific knowledge, his codification of the rules for logical discourse, and his confidence in the power of the human intelligence were all exactly concordant with the new tendencies of rationalism and naturalism growing in the medieval West -- and were attractive to many Church intellectuals, men whose reasoning powers had been developed to uncommon acuity by their long scholastic education in the logical disputation of doctrinal subtleties. The arrival of the Aristotelian texts in Europe thus found a distinctly receptive audience, and Aristotle was soon referred to as "the Philosopher." This shift in the wind of medieval thought would have momentous consequences.
Under the Church's auspices, the universities were evolving into remarkable centers of learning where students gathered from all over Europe to study and hear public lectures and disputations by the masters. As learning developed, the scholars' attitude toward Christian belief became less unthinking and more self-reflective. The use of reason to examine and defend articles of faith, already exploited in the eleventh century by Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, and the discipline of logic in particular, championed by the fiery twelfth-century, dialectician Abelart Ranidlv ascended in both educational popular and theological importance. With Abelard's Sic et Non (Yes and No), a compilation of apparently contradictory statements by various Church authorities, medieval thinkers became increasingly preoccupied with the possible plurality of truth, with debate between competing arguments, and with the growing power of human reason for discerning correct doctrine. It is not that Christian truths were called into question; rather, they were now subject to analysis. As Anselm stated, "It seems to me a case of negligence if, after becoming firm in our faith, we do not strive to understand what we believe."
Moreover, after a long struggle with local religious and political authorities, the universities won the right from king and pope to form their own communities. With the University of Paris's receipt of a written charter from the Holy See in 1215, a new dimension entered European civilization, with the universities now existing as relatively autonomous enters of culture devoted to the pursuit of knowledge. Although Christian theology and dogma presided over this pursuit, these were in turn increasingly permeated by the rationalist spirit. It was into this fertile context that the new translations of Aristotle and his Arabic commentators were introduced.
Anselm was the Archbishop of Canterbury who created Scholasticism, a means of dialectical reasoning that he used to prove the existence of God. He also openly opposed the Crusades, which means he was incredibly bold and defiantly compassionate. From here, and in the same snowballing, story-telling mode, Tarnas goes on to describe Thomas Aquinas in one of my favorite parts of the book.
October 2, 2011
An impressive synthesis of a lot of material; excellent review of the "Greek mind" and how it persists; of the "Judeao-Christian mind" and how it persists. Perhaps most provocative is the suggestion that we are somehow mystically evolving into a new consciousness (Gaia), and that the roots of this come out of Freud, Jung, Groff, and the psychedelics, with an accompanying shift from a masculine dominated intellectual culture to a feminine one.
One HUGE omission: what about the non-Western mind? There is no attention to where the rest of the world's "world view" has come from and no mention of whether this revolution in Western thinking is visible anywhere else. It may be, but there's no case for that in this book.
One HUGE omission: what about the non-Western mind? There is no attention to where the rest of the world's "world view" has come from and no mention of whether this revolution in Western thinking is visible anywhere else. It may be, but there's no case for that in this book.
February 2, 2022
I was looking for the how Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, and Newton changed our understanding of the cosmos. Tarnas is very good on this. But there is much, much more besides.
I took off one star for his conclusion which pushes his viewpoint a bit too far -- Jung over Freud. And one star for never confronting the problem of the temporal and spatial boundaries of the "West." And for his vast understatement of the influence of Hegel and Marx. They both appear but do not get as large a role as, say, Descartes and Locke.
Still, I recommend it for a detailed overview of the "western" consciousness.
I took off one star for his conclusion which pushes his viewpoint a bit too far -- Jung over Freud. And one star for never confronting the problem of the temporal and spatial boundaries of the "West." And for his vast understatement of the influence of Hegel and Marx. They both appear but do not get as large a role as, say, Descartes and Locke.
Still, I recommend it for a detailed overview of the "western" consciousness.
April 16, 2015
Beautiful synthesis of the development of Western thinking (starting with the Greeks), but with a a very narrow focus on philosophy (metaphysics and epistomology) and strangely also on astrology. The first 400 pages seem really excellent, at times even brillant, but then Tarnas deviates into a rather psychedelic ally.
September 16, 2014
كتاب رائع،،عرض العقل الغربي بشكل مركز ،نقدي ، وموجز ..يعطيك الكثير من التفسيرات للظواهر الحديثة اليومية، و الاتجاهات العلمية، بل و يعطيك نوعاً من الضوء لما سيحصل في المستقبل..
March 30, 2020
لا أعتقد أني في حياتي قرأت عمل بهذا القدر من الأهمية و الشمولية للفكر الغربي.
February 16, 2024
I'm now convinced we need to topple the patriarchy
September 12, 2018
Sweet, lucid and concise overview of western thought. I'm familiar with a fair amount of the material that Tarnas surveys here, and I'd say that he accurately and effectively conveys the essentials of their arguments. It's like the best SparkNotes ever written, except that rather than summarizing an author in isolation he integrates them in an intelligible historical narrative. I’d recommend this as resource material for anyone doing an arts degree - especially for those studying philosophy, history or psychology.
Tarnas' own thesis, which he reveals at the end of the book, is that the passion of the western mind is towards reunification with its ground. Western thought: male, directed, linguistic (phallogocentric) is ultimately animated by the purpose of the cosmos, the telos which exists in nature. It thus tends to reveal the meaning which modern thought had removed from a world conceived as disenchanted. Tarnas thus sees hope beyond the impasse and alienation of post-modern (I'd say: late-modern) thought, in the rise of the archetypal feminine, within feminism and pluralistic articulations of "the other" (e.g. ecological spirituality, minority and queer studies, etc). I largely sympathize with his thesis, with the qualification that no apocalyptic total reunification is possible, that western philosophy must be seen as participating in rather than comprehending the purpose of nature, that the pinnacle of male thought cannot be seen as encompassing an essentially passive female archetype, and that we are the children rather than the fulfillment of creation.
In sum: this brilliant survey ultimately articulates a left-feminist Jungian interpretation of western thought. It could be usefully paired with the conservative-masculine Jungian account of Jordan Peterson.
Tarnas' own thesis, which he reveals at the end of the book, is that the passion of the western mind is towards reunification with its ground. Western thought: male, directed, linguistic (phallogocentric) is ultimately animated by the purpose of the cosmos, the telos which exists in nature. It thus tends to reveal the meaning which modern thought had removed from a world conceived as disenchanted. Tarnas thus sees hope beyond the impasse and alienation of post-modern (I'd say: late-modern) thought, in the rise of the archetypal feminine, within feminism and pluralistic articulations of "the other" (e.g. ecological spirituality, minority and queer studies, etc). I largely sympathize with his thesis, with the qualification that no apocalyptic total reunification is possible, that western philosophy must be seen as participating in rather than comprehending the purpose of nature, that the pinnacle of male thought cannot be seen as encompassing an essentially passive female archetype, and that we are the children rather than the fulfillment of creation.
In sum: this brilliant survey ultimately articulates a left-feminist Jungian interpretation of western thought. It could be usefully paired with the conservative-masculine Jungian account of Jordan Peterson.
July 9, 2019
Written with energy - a constant rhythm of amazement. To bad this book is (very) uncritical, it just tells and tells without much arguments. What's worse is are lines like:
"A spontaneous and irreducible revolution of consciousness was taking place, affecting virtually every aspect of Western culture. Amidst high drama and painful convulsions, modern man was born in the Renaissance, "trailing clouds of glory.""
A few paragraphs earlier Tarnas states that this revolution of consciousness cannot be explained by the context --- Come on, one can't state this after less then 10 pages summarizing cultural, economical, political, religious factors that are very paradoxical and most of all new. Even Hegel is hard to believe, and he takes 100s of pages to make an argument for a continuous revolution of consciousness.
Still, I would recommend this book to everyone (who is not too scholary) with an interest in a history of the western mind. It is relatively easy to read and because Tarnas gives summaries it is easy to skip the parts that are of no interest for you.
"A spontaneous and irreducible revolution of consciousness was taking place, affecting virtually every aspect of Western culture. Amidst high drama and painful convulsions, modern man was born in the Renaissance, "trailing clouds of glory.""
A few paragraphs earlier Tarnas states that this revolution of consciousness cannot be explained by the context --- Come on, one can't state this after less then 10 pages summarizing cultural, economical, political, religious factors that are very paradoxical and most of all new. Even Hegel is hard to believe, and he takes 100s of pages to make an argument for a continuous revolution of consciousness.
Still, I would recommend this book to everyone (who is not too scholary) with an interest in a history of the western mind. It is relatively easy to read and because Tarnas gives summaries it is easy to skip the parts that are of no interest for you.
August 26, 2021
Read this for a class and just came back to read the last section that was never assigned.
This is fantastic. Full stop. This book completely restructured my world view and recentered my understanding of history. I would recommend this to anyone with an interest in philosophy, sociology, history, religious studies, anthropology, psychology etc etc.
Tarnas is a fantastic writer, the book is full and dense but easy and enjoyable to read and written with a degree of empathy (?) that i think is key to the overall success of the book. Tarnas outlines the progression of western thought from pre-socratics right up to acid dropping radical feminists but remains non-judgy and entirely unpreachy ( at least until the epilogue). Tarnas puts himself in the contexts he is writing about, approaching well known philosophical concepts from their own perspective, highlighting the social, political, scientific situation of each different individual philosopher and their theories.
This rocked my mind and I hope to re-read it many times in my life.
This is fantastic. Full stop. This book completely restructured my world view and recentered my understanding of history. I would recommend this to anyone with an interest in philosophy, sociology, history, religious studies, anthropology, psychology etc etc.
Tarnas is a fantastic writer, the book is full and dense but easy and enjoyable to read and written with a degree of empathy (?) that i think is key to the overall success of the book. Tarnas outlines the progression of western thought from pre-socratics right up to acid dropping radical feminists but remains non-judgy and entirely unpreachy ( at least until the epilogue). Tarnas puts himself in the contexts he is writing about, approaching well known philosophical concepts from their own perspective, highlighting the social, political, scientific situation of each different individual philosopher and their theories.
This rocked my mind and I hope to re-read it many times in my life.
May 20, 2008
Richard Tarnas' book, The Passion of the Western Mind, descriptively and eloquently chronicles the evolution of human discoveries and consciousness (from the time of ancient Greece to modern times). I'm a homeschooling mom and am currently using Tarnas' book to prepare myself for history lessons with my child. It provides a wonderful context by describing the leading ideas of an historical time period. In that way I can help my daughter understand the culture and motivations of a people so that she can acquire more than a stale chronology of history.
July 2, 2009
This book gave me a great overview of the history of our thinking, and tremendous respect for the long traditions we benefit from. It links the different eras in a brilliant way and gives just the right level of detail to really understand each era, including the Greeks, the Christians, the Enlightenment and modern thinking.
Only the last chapter on Postmodernism doesn't quite make it - but given that this book was published before Ken Wilber's greatest works (in 1991) so had not benefited from Integral Theory yet, I forgive Richard Tarnas!
Only the last chapter on Postmodernism doesn't quite make it - but given that this book was published before Ken Wilber's greatest works (in 1991) so had not benefited from Integral Theory yet, I forgive Richard Tarnas!
May 11, 2013
This is the best book to read in order to understand Western thought and its development. If you want to close the gap between how you and westerners tend to view much of the world around us, then this book helps you get on that track. It defines the line of thought through which they have progressed to where they are today. Very surprising stories... e.g. "Human Evolution" was actually conceived to great detail by the Pre-Socratic Greeks?
This book is currently leading me on a philosophical rampage!
This book is currently leading me on a philosophical rampage!
January 22, 2021
La mentalità occidentale: idee che si scontrano, innestano, emergono e decadono, seguendo la spinta della coscienza umana e della natura a manifestarsi. Ho trovato il libro molto approfondito, una storia delle idee che culmina negli ultimi capitoli con una prospettiva originale e ispirata: l'evolversi costante delle idee come manifestazione armonica di stati archetipici della psiche collettiva. Una bellissima scrittura, avvincente, fine, che mi ha dato nuova conoscenza filosofica e infuso una sensazione di attiva speranza, come raramente mi succede dopo la lettura di un saggio.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 194 reviews