The Philosophy Book - Will Buckingham

   2011; 774 pages.  Full Title: The Philosophy Book: Big Ideas Simply Explained.   New Author? : Yes.  Genres : Philosophy; Biographies; Non-Fiction; Reference.  Overall Rating: 9*/10.

 

    Quick, what exactly is the definition of the word “Philosophy”?  My best try would be something like “Trying to know the Unknowable”, which is both oxymoronic and pretty useless.

 

    The Philosophy Book, by Will Buckingham has a better answer, and it comes in both a long and a short version.  The long one is:

 

    “Any sustained rational reflection about general principles that has the aim of achieving a deeper understanding.”  That’s not much better than mine.  The short one is:

 

    “The love of wisdom.”

 

    I like that one much better.

 

What’s To Like...

    The subtitle of The Philosophy Book is worth noting: Big Ideas Simply Explained.  At 774 pages, this book introduces the reader to an incredible array of philosophers and philosophies from all parts of the world (not just Western civilization) and down through the ages (from 750 BCE to the present).  Altogether, 107 philosophers are examined, and in a roughly chronological order.

 

After an introductory overview, the book is divided into six sections:

    01. The Ancient World  (700 BCE – 250 CE)

    02. The Medieval World  (250 – 1500)

    03. Renaissance and the Age of Reason  (1500 – 1750)

    04. The Age of Revolution  (1750 – 1900)

    05. The Modern World  (1900 – 1950)

    06. Contemporary Philosophy  (1950 – present)

 

    The template for presenting each philosopher is:

First Page

    Catchy Aphorism

    Philosopher’s Name, Year Born, Year Died

Second Page

    Branch of Philosophy

    Approach

    Those “Before” who influenced the philosopher

    Those "After" who were influenced by the philosopher

Text

    Introduction to the philosopher

    Flow Charts (usually)

    Quotations (occasionally)

    Discussion of philosopher’s main tenets

    Biography

    Key Works

    “See Also”

    Pictures (usually)

 

    Additional sections in the back include a Directory (great for looking up any philosopher, famous or obscure), a Glossary (great for looking up any of the -isms, -ologies, and other technical terms coined in the book), and Contributors, which lists all those who helped Will Buckingham write this book.  All of the writers are English, so you occasionally run across spellings like: sceptical, judgement, defence, furore, no-one, artefact, and fulfil.  But curiously, some effort seems to have been made to Americanize the text, with spellings such as judgment and color.

 

    I liked that the book didn’t limit itself to European and American philosophers; there were a sizable number of Arab, Eastern Asian, and African philosophers included.  Ditto for Women and Black philosophers, at least when we got to modern times.

 

    “Felicific Calculus” made me chuckle; it’s an algorithm by which you can supposedly calculate happiness.  I loved reading about Rumi and Sufism with the “Whirling Dervishes”.  Mozi was new to me, but his thoughts resonated with me.  I enjoyed getting reacquainted with the mystic Moses Maimonides, whose works I read way back in my Metaphysical Days.  And I was amazed to read that the first Atomic Theory was developed strictly through reasoning and put forth in the fifth century BCE!

 

Ratings…
    Amazon:  4.6/5 based on 3,237 ratings and 583 reviews.

    Goodreads: 4.17/5 based on 4,779 ratings and 364 reviews

 

Excerpts...

    We may think it is not “good” to make a fool of ourselves in public, and so resist the urge to dance joyfully in the street.  We may believe that the desires of the flesh are sinful, and so punish ourselves when they arise.  We may stay in mind-numbing jobs, not because we need to, but because we feel it is our duty to do so.  Nietzsche wants to put an end to such life-denying philosophies, so that humankind can see itself in a different way.  (loc. 4270)

 

    In the introduction to The Second Sex de Beauvoir notes society’s awareness of this fluidity: “We are exhorted to be women, remain women, become women.  It would appear, then, that every female human being is not necessarily a woman.”  She later states the position explicitly: “One is not born but becomes a woman.”

    De Beauvoir says that women must free themselves both from the idea that they must be like men, and from the passivity that society has induced in them.  Living a truly authentic existence carries more risk than accepting a role handed down by society, but it is the only path to equality and freedom.  (loc. 5626)

 

Kindle Details…

    The Philosophy Book sells for $8.99 at Amazon right now.  Will Buckingham has at least 10 other e-books available, in a wide variety of subjects, including Philosophy, Self-Help, and Children's Tales, ranging in price from $3.99 to $46.50.

 

“When one thinks like a mountain, one thinks also like the black bear, so that honey dribbles down your fur as you catch the bus to work.”  (loc. 5763)

    It’s hard to find things to nitpick about in The Philosophy Book.  Some reviewers groused about the lack of depth in the book, but hey, if you’re going to cover 2,700 years and 100+ philosophers in the book, I am happy the text limited itself to just the basics.

 

    The flow charts and pictures added a nice touch to the book, but that came at the cost of a huge file size.  Amazon lists it as being 192,824 kilobytes.  Think twice about downloading this if your Kindle is almost full, maybe opting for the paperback version which right now is only a couple dollars more than the e-book.

 

    My last nit to pick is a personal one.  How come Martin Buber wasn’t included in the 107 philosophers selected??  His magnum opus, “Ich und Du” (“I and Thou” in English) was required reading in a Sociology class I took in college, and the professor’s favorite reference book.  To be fair, Buber does get mentioned in The Philosophy Book, but only in passing.

 

    Enough quibbling.  The Philosophy Book is a fantastic reference source for anyone who wants to learn more about what all those thinkers have been thinking about for the past 27 centuries, but who don’t want to have to wade through their voluminous tomes.  That was me, and I am totally glad I read this.

 

    9 Stars.  We’ll close with an excerpt that, in a way, illustrates why I don’t read a lot of books about philosophy.  We’re quoting directly from the Glossary of The Philosophy Book.

 

 Metaphilosophy: The branch of philosophy that looks at the nature and methods of philosophy itself.

 

    How perplexingly tautological.

The Man Who Was Thursday - G.K. Chesterton

   1908; 121 pages.  Full Title: The Man Who Was Thursday - A Nightmare.  New Author? : Yes.  Genre : Satire; Philosophical Conjecture; Middlebrow Literature; Surreal Fantasy.  Overall Rating : 5½*/10.

    Lucian Gregory and Gabriel Syme are poets.  They are also self-styled philosophers which means they love to have debates just for the fun of it.  Right now (in Edwardian-era London) they’re discussing the philosophy of the anarchist movement, a subject which they are pleased to have opposing views about.

    Gregory feels that anarchy is the highest form of poetry.  Bombs going kerboom! and revolting peasants are the ultimate expression of any of the arts.  Syme disagrees.  The embodiment of poetry is the Law, not Revolution; and his fellow poet deceives himself when he thinks he’s a serious anarchist.

    This upsets Gregory, and he feels compelled to prove his point.  He takes Syme to a secret anarchist meeting, but first makes him swear by everything sacred not to reveal what he is about to witness to anyone else.  Syme complies but in turn requires Gregory to swear not to tell anyone else a secret Syme’s about to tell him.

    Syme is an undercover detective for Scotland Yard, working in their anti-anarchy department.

What’s To Like...

    The Man Who Was Thursday is a bizarre piece of classic literature, first published in 1908, which defies being pigeonholed into any single genre.   I initially thought it was going to focus on the honor of keeping one’s word, no matter what.  Later I thought that it would give me a good idea of what the turn-of-the-20^th-century world thought about anarchists.  Alas, neither of these expectations panned out.

    The story is filled with G.K. Chesterton’s wit, which was my main motivation for reading this book.  He might not offer any deep insights into the anarchist movement, but I enjoyed his sardonic views on revolutionaries, law enforcement agencies, honor, and putting on airs.  The settings are minimal – the greater London area and a brief excursion to the coast of France - but I have visited, and thoroughly enjoy, both of those places..

    I liked the “feel” of life back then.  Skyscrapers were a new phenomenon, motor-cars were around but much less common than horse-drawn carriages, and you went by ship to get from London to France because, well, commercial flights didn’t exist.  The philosophical debate in chapter one was fun to listen in on, and I always enjoy learning a new French phrase, in this case: “Pagens ont tort et Chretiens ont droit.”

    The book is written in English, so you see navvies at work, find yourself disorganised yet cosy, push a perambulator (and only now did I realise that’s the longer form of “pram”), study at Board Schools, and entertain guests in your parlour.  I never did figure out what a man described as “somewhat of the type of Mr. Tim Healy” was like, nor why the phrase “what about Martin Tupper now?” was uttered.

     The pacing felt uneven.  The philosophy debate went by fast, but the recruitment section seemed to drag.  The first chase (the good guys running from the bad guys) zipped along just fine, but it was immediately followed by a second chase (the bad guys running from the good guys), and by then I was ready for the storyline to get going again.

    The book is short – only 121 pages – which barely qualifies as a novel.  There is a poem at the beginning which, although well done, didn’t seem to contribute to the story at all.  The ending is positively surreal, which I liked, and there's an offbeat “Row, row, row your boat” twist in the epilogue.  I’d attribute these to the ingestion of LSD by Chesterton, but acid wouldn’t be discovered for another 20 years.

Kewlest New Word ...

Bally (adj.) : a euphemism for bloody; a Britishism used as an intensive, as in “a bally stupid idea.”

Others : Falneur (n.); Cicerone (n.); Badinage (n.).

Kindle Details...

    You can get the e-book version of The Man Who Was Thursday for anything from free to $7.99 at Amazon.  Needless to say, I opted for the cheapest option.  Quite a few of G.K. Chesterton’s e-books at Amazon go for $0.99, and you can even get a 50-book collection of his works, which includes The Man Who Was Thursday, for a mere $1.99.  These things happen when the copyright protection has expired.

Excerpts...

    Through all this ordeal his root horror had been isolation, and there are no words to express the abyss between isolation and having one ally.  It may be conceded to the mathematicians that four is twice two.  But two is not twice one; two is two thousand times one.  That is why, in spite of a hundred disadvantages, the world will always return to monogamy. (loc. 1293)

    “He insulted my mother.”

    “Insulted your mother!” exclaimed the gentleman incredulously.

    “Well, anyhow,” said Syme, conceding a point, “my aunt.”

    “But how can the Marquis have insulted your aunt just now?” said the second gentleman with some legitimate wonder.  “He has been sitting here all the time.”

    “Ah, it was what he said!” said Syme darkly.

    “I said nothing at all,” said the Marquis, “except something about the band.  I only said that I liked Wagner played well.”

    “It was an allusion to my family,” said Syme firmly.  “My aunt played Wagner badly.  It was a painful subject.  We are always being insulted about it.”  (loc. 1662)

 “If you’d take your head home and boil it for a turnip it might be useful.”  (loc. 1038)

    The main problem with The Man Who Was Thursday is its incoherent storyline.  It starts off as a Philosophical treatise (what is anarchy?), then switches to a tale of Intrigue (who’s a cop, who’s not?), then does the Chase trope, not once but twice, and finishes up with a Surreal get-together that would’ve made Salvador Dali get all misty-eyed.

    There are some plot twists but they all seemed either telegraphed or forced.  Finally, one of the protagonists, Lucian Gregory, goes MIA after a few chapters, and doesn’t reappear until the very end.

    I sort of got the feeling G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936) had some fascinating and adventurous ideas for our two philosopher-poets to experience in the world of anarchists, but tried to jam them all into a single hundred-page story.  Personally, I think it would've been better to spread them out into a series.

    5½ Stars.  I found The Man Who Was Thursday to be witty, but oftentimes confusing and incoherent.  If I had to describe it in one sentence, it would be: “How Monty Python’s The Holy Grail would sound like if it had been written in 1908”.  That may sound fantastic, and the book certainly has its moments, but in the end it just doesn’t hold together well.

Philosophy: A Beginner's Guide - Peter Cave

   2014; 240 pages.  Full Title: Philosophy: A Beginner’s Guide.  New Author? : No.    Genre : Non-Fiction; Philosophy; Reference.  Overall Rating : 7*/10.

    Ah, Philosophy!  Wikipedia, the source of all knowledge and wisdom IMO, defines it as “the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language”.

    Well that’s just fine and dandy.  But if you find yourself trapped in an elevator with a philosopher, just how do you talk the talk with him/her?  “Yo, bro!  To be or not to be”, perhaps?  Or how about, “I think therefore I am.”  Maybe the more metaphysical, “Can God make a stone so heavy that even He/She can’t lift it?”

    Hmm.  Perhaps we should read a book about Philosophy.  Preferably one aimed at newbies to the subject.  You never know when you'll find yourself stuck in an elevator with a philosopher.

What’s To Like...

    Philosophy: A Beginner’s Guide has 10 Chapters (12, if you add in the Prologue and the Epilogue).  Briefly, they are :

P. Take Your Time.  What is philosophy?

1.  What is it to be human?  I think, therefore I am.

2.  Are we responsible for what we do?  Free will, determinism.

3.  Surviving.  Does the “I” change as we age?  Who are “you”?

4.  What – morally – ought we to do?  Situational ethics.

5. Political philosophy: what justifies the state?  What is legally/rightfully mine?

6. Mind, brain and body.  Is pain psychological or physical?

7. What, then, is knowledge?  How do we “know” something?

8. How sceptical should we be?  Science and skepticism.

9. God: For and against.  Big Bang vs. Intelligent Design.

10. The arts: what is the point?  Aesthetics and “the message”.  How do we judge art?

E.  Mortality, immortality and the meaning of life.  What is the meaning of life?  What is immortality worth?

    My favorites were Chapters 4, 5, 8, and the Epilogue.  Yours will probably be different.

   The book is written in English, not American, so you encounter words like scepticism, defence, programmes, and skilful.  MS-Word’s spellcheck program just went crazy over that sentence.  The author points out that it isn’t necessary to read the chapters in order, but I did anyway.

    This is also a book to read in “small bites”, as my brain rapidly got weary trying to keep straight all the “isms” that Peter Cave examines.  Really.  Here’s a fairly complete list: Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Theory, Particularism, Dualism, Free Will, Determinism, Rationalism, Empiricism, Voluntarism, Egalitarianism, Libertarianism, Logical Behaviorism, Materialism, Cartesian Dualism, Epiphenomenalism, Functionalism, Skepticism, Fallibilism, Phenomenalism, Naturalism, and Instrumentalism.  Whew!  And I may have missed a couple that appeared before I started to make a list of them.

    Peter Cave presents lots of muse-worthy scenarios and examines the various ways to judge them.  I often started out with a first-thought conclusion, then had to reexamine it in the face of Cave’s arguments.  The “two lobes of the brain” one was especially fascinating.

    I also encountered some neat people and things that I was already familiar with, such as the Turing Test, Novalis, Nietzsche, Ockham’s Razor, and Kafka’s “Metamorphosis”.  Cave includes “mini bios” of almost every philosopher he cites in the book, often with some ironic and little-known “twist” in their life.  Way kewl.

Excerpts...

    What is it like to be a bat?

    However much we may learn about the bat’s echo system, however much we may examine the bat’s neural structures – whatever flights of fancy we may engage, when hanging upside down from the chapel’s rafters flapping our arms – we may still feel that there is something forever elusive; the bat’s consciousness, its perspective on the world.

    What, indeed, is it like to be a bat?

    Even if bats could talk, we could not understand them.  (loc. 1792)

    Scepticism can be traced to the ancient Greek Pyrrho of Elis.  Some sceptics would claim nothing can be known – not even that nothing can be known.  Ancient anecdotes abound of Pyrrho ignoring precipices, dangerous dogs and other hazards for he had no good reason to trust his senses.  Fortunately, he had good friends who were not so sceptical; they steered him away from disasters in waiting.  (loc. 2089)

Kindle Details...

    Philosophy:A Beginner’s Guide sells for $6.15 at Amazon.  Peter Cave has written at least two other books for the Beginner’s Guide series, Humanism (which is on my Kindle, waiting to be read) and Ethics (which I have not yet purchased).  The former is also priced at $6.15.  The latter goes for $9.99.  The author also has several of his own books on Philosophical Puzzles, which are more light-hearted, and which are in the $8.49-$11.50 range.

 ‘Tis better to be a dissatisfied Socrates than a satisfied pig.  (loc. 1004)

    Full disclosure #1: I am not a big fan of Philosophy.  I find it mostly a bunch of gobblety-gook, and those who expound upon it to be filled with themselves and hot air.  Philosophy: A Beginner’s Guide did not change my views on this.  The book poses lots of great questions and issues, and offers the reader no conclusions.  But hey, that’s philosophy for you.

    Full disclosure #2: I am a big fan of Peter Cave.  I’ve read two of his other books on Philosophy, namely: Do Llamas Fall In Love? and Can A Robot be Human?  They are reviewed here and here, and I enjoyed both those books.  P:ABG was still a good read, it's just that the constraints of writing a worthwhile reference means that it isn't the author's best stuff.  If you want to see Peter Cave at his best, pick up DLFIL?

    7 Stars.  FYI, there apparently are a slew of books, on all sorts of different subjects, in the Beginner’s Guide series.  They are listed in the back of this e-book, albeit without links, and are published by Oneworld Publications.  I suspect they are meant to be a rival of the “(Such and such) For Dummies” series.

Robots Like Blue - Anthony J. Deeney

    2014; 345 pages.  Full Title : Robots Like Blue – Freedom Has A Price.  New Author? : Yes.  Genre : Science Fiction; Visionary.  Overall Rating : 7*/10.

    It’s the 22^nd century, and robots are just starting to be household items.  The major marketer of these is Enorpa Robotics, and while there’s nothing wrong with their robots, they nevertheless lack a certain je ne sais quoi.

    Harrowgate & Webster Robotics is the newcomer to the field, and their aim is to take some of the market-share away from Enorpa.  They may be lacking in resources and cash-flow, but what they have going for them (they hope) is vastly superior robot programming.  Their machines are programmed to respond in a more humanlike manner to questions and commands, and their programs will evaluate, and  self-modify, based on the interaction with humans.  Harrowgate & Webster are counting on the customers liking this “warmth”.

    The first prototypes of H&W’s new Gen-5 line of robots have just been shipped on a trial basis, and Lucy Walker is one of the few select recipients.  She is recently widowed, with two small kids, so having a machine to help with the chores is a godsend.  Lucy’s kids quickly dub the new robot “Robbie”, and the reader gets to follow Robbie as he learns the mystifying and complicated ways of humans.  It seems likely that, once the trial period is over, Lucy will sign a contract and purchase Robbie on a permanent basis.

    Just be sure you read the small print in that contract, Lucy.  You never know what rights you’ve just given away.

What’s To Like...

    The primary theme of Robots Like Blue, at least for the first half of the book, is: Can a robot ever become human?  This is a surprisingly tricky question, since it must first be determined what makes something human.  H. Beam Piper explored this in Little Fuzzy (reviewed here), albeit in terms of “When is a species sufficiently sentient to where we communicate with them instead of killing/eating them?”  And Peter Cave offers a lighthearted overview in his excellent book: Can A Robot Be Human (reviewed here).

    Anthony J. Deeney gives a realistic take on the subject; you’ll find no I, Robot or Terminator nightmare here.  But you will see the Turing Test being applied, meet Schrodinger’s cat, and find that Robbie has synesthesia.

    The writing is straightforward, but not weak.  Some robots get recycled, and you may feel a tinge of remorse when this happens.  There are some chuckles when Robbie takes some human phrases literally, and I really wished there’d been more of these.  The book is written in “British”, which I always like.

    There’s not a lot of world-building, given that the story is set in England a century in the future.  But I think that was just a literary device to set the premise for household robots.  The ending felt rushed, didn’t resolve all the issues, and left most of the characters in the lurch.  This might be to set up a sequel, but it any case it felt quite anti-climactic.

Excerpts...

    “Robot, are you self aware?”

    Robot spent several milliseconds considering the question and then said, “Does it matter?”

    Barbara responded.  “It seemed to matter to our owners, Claire and Leo.  They said that it would trouble them if I was self aware and had the status of a slave.  Do you think that we are self aware?”

    “Have you asked the Alpha?”

    “He said the question was ‘human’, and has no meaning for us.  He said it was not dissimilar to asking if we like the colour blue.”  (loc. 1173)

    “Ms Lydon, I recognise that in your experience as a counsellor, your argument would appear to carry some weight.”

    He looked up from his notes and smiled.

    Claire smiled back, “Thank you,  I have been a counsellor for fifteen years.”

    “You will, of course, be aware of the theory of Solipsism.”

    “Yes, I am.  Solipsism, the idea that only one’s own mind is sure to exist.  It is, of course, nonsense!  One wonders why a solipsist would bother trying to persuade other, possibly non-existent, entities that they possibly don’t exist.”  (loc. 3688)

Kindle Details...

    Robots Like Blue currently sells for $2.99 at Amazon, although I’ve seen it offered for free a couple times already.  ANAICT, this is Anthony J. Deeney’s only e-book available thus far.

  

“What if your creator is evil?  Would it be ‘wrong’ to defy him then?”  (loc. 5181)

    The first half of Robots Like Blue was great, but then it seemed to lose its focus, and the overriding issue of “can a robot can be self-aware” gave way to “do humans have souls”.  There was a lot more telling than showing in the second half, including two cases of extended banter – one in the courtroom, the other in a bar.

    The dialogues also took on an air of preachiness, touching on subjects like original sin and fallen angels.  It didn’t get overbearing, but it did distract from the basic theme of robots and their inner nature.  It would’ve been better to tie up more of the storyline threads and stay on topic.

    Still, RLB was a worthwhile read, and it was nice to see a plausible look at how robots might be utilized in another hundred years or so.

    7 Stars.  Add 1 star if it doesn’t bother you that a book’s theme shifts right in the middle of its storyline.

Can A Robot Be Human? - Peter Cave

   2007; 196 pages.  Full Title : Can A Robot Be Human?  33 Perplexing Philosophy Puzzles.  New Author? : No.  Genre : Philosophy; Non-Fiction.  Overall Rating : 7½*/10.

    Question : What do the following phrases have in common?  "Wolves, Whistles, and Women".  "The Dangers of Health".  "Don’t Tell Him, Pike".  "Don’t Read This Notice".  "Therapy for Tortoises".

    Answer :  They’re all titles of chapters in Peter Cave’s book of almost three dozen pieces of philosophical musing, Can A Robot Be Human?

    If you are intrigued by those titles and are itching for something to challenge your Situational Ethics, Logic Systems, and Outlook on Life, then run down to your library (or log on to Amazon) and get this book.  Especially if, like me, you are the kind of person who finds most Philosophy books to be eminently boring.

What’s To Like...

     Structure-wise, Can A Robot Be Human? is identical to the other Peter Cave book I read a few months back, Do Llamas Fall In Love? (reviewed here).  So most of my comments in that review apply here as well.

    The chapters are short (usually 5 paperback pages); there are some amusing cartoons interspersed throughout the chapters; and for the most part, the writing is witty and thought-provoking. A wide variety of themes are dealt with, and the author lists the two main ones in the header of each chapter.  Don’t like a given chapter’s subject matter?  No problem; the next one is guaranteed to be on something completely different.

    Peter Cave won't give you the answers to life's mysteries, of course.  No philosopher ever does.  But he will give you lots of points to muse upon.   

    Some examples of the themes addressed in the book : The Emotions, Feminism, Metaphysics, Free Will, The Arts, Politics, Language, Rational Action, Religion, Space & Time, Selves, God, Good & Evil.

    These translate into questions such as : Can you trust a liar?  What makes you “you”?  How would you know if you’re dreaming?  Can you ever truly do a selfless act of goodness?  And the titular : How would you know if you’re a robot?

    Kafka gets cited; that’s always a personal plus.  And the Monty Hall enigma, “should you switch doors?”, is examined, which is both remarkably simple and incredibly complex; and which generated oodles of heated debate a few years ago in Marilyn vos Savant’s newspaper column.  The answer, without explanation, is given in the comments.

    YMMV, but my favorite chapters were :

    03) Sympathy for the Devil  (is the Creator good or evil?)

    07) The Innocent Murderer : A Nobody Dunit  (Define “murder”)

    17) Girl, Cage, Chimp  (Animal Rights)

    21) Saints, Sinners, and Suicide Bombers  (Religious Blind Faith)

    23) Uniquely Who?  (What makes you “You”?)

    33) Is This All There Is?  (What is the point of life?)

Excerpts...

     Those who believe in an all-powerful figure that created and designed the universe need to explain why they are convinced he is all good rather than all bad – or, indeed, something in between.  Is it not most likely that there are at least two distinct and powerful powers, one evil and one good?  Zoroastrianism is typically taken as proclaiming such a duality.  Is it the only sensible religion?  Paradoxically, that could explain why hardly anyone believes in it.  (pg. 17)

    “What is it like to be a bat?”  That question is one way of raising the difficulty.  However much we humans learn about the behaviour and neural structures of bats, however much crazed philosophers hang upside down from church towers, flapping their arms, is there not something that we miss – namely, how bats experience the world?  Plausibly, we should answer ‘yes’.  (pg. 170)

“Down with the mini skirt!”.  (pg.  66)

    ANAICT, Can A Robot Be Human? was Peter Cave’s debut book.  I am relying on the Amazon listings since there isn’t even a Wikipedia entry for him.  While it was overall entertaining, witty, and full of contemplatibles, for me it also had a couple slow spots.  Some of the logic topics seemed too easy to disprove, and I’ve already pondered René Descartes question about how to know if you exist, and concluded (unlike M. Descartes and his “Cogito Ergo Sum”) that it was a pointless waste of time and thought.

     It’s also possible that reading two Philosophy books in less than 4 months was too much for my lowbrow literary palate.  Or that Peter Cave’s writing became much more polished and interest-generating with time.  Let’s be clear – this is still a worthwhile read, and a smart and delightful choice if/when your English teacher says you have to do a book report on Philosophy.

    But honestly now, which title tickles your fancy more?  Can A Robot Be Human?  or Do Llamas Fall In Love?  7½ Stars.

Anecdotal Postscript...

    One of the chapters deals with the mathematical concept of “limits”, which Peter Cave cleverly turns into a Logic puzzle.  Here is the way I first heard it, years ago :

    A frog is 10 feet from a wall.  With every hop, he covers half the (remaining) distance to it.  So, his first jump is 5 feet.  And since he is now only 5 feet away, his second jump is 2½ feet.  And so on.  Question :  When does he finally bump into the wall?  (Answer in the comments)

    This was a recurring poser that we used to spring upon new hires at work (we had a high turnover rate).  The answers, after some cogitation, were amusingly varied.  Two, three, five, ten, etc.

    But the best answer came one day as a coworker and I were working outside.  He abruptly announced he needed to do something inside for a bit, went in, came out 2-3 minutes later, and told me he knew the answer.

    “22!” sez he, with smug glee.

    I was nonplussed. “How did you arrive at that answer?” sez I.

    “I cheated.  I did it on the calculator.”

    Turns out he entered “10” into the 8-place calculator we had in the lab, then kept dividing by 2 until the readout was all zeroes.  You gotta admire his resourcefulness.  March on, O Theoretical Math!

Do Llamas Fall In Love? - Peter Cave

   2010; 223 pages.  Full Title : Do Llamas Fall In Love?  33 Perplexing Philosophy Puzzles.  New Author? : Yes.  Genre : Philosophy; Non-Fiction.  Overall Rating : 9*/10.

    You wake up one mundane Monday, only to discover that this Monday is far from mundane.  A tube runs from your body to an unknown man a few feet away.  A violinist, it transpires, is plugged into your lymphatic system.  ...  Are you within your rights to unplug the violinist?

    If the above scenario is the kind of situational ethics question that floats your boat, then you will thoroughly enjoy Do Llamas Fall In Love?  It is the start of Chapter Three therein, and gives some great food for thought as to just how far your basic rights extend, as well as those of the violinist whose life depends on your body.

What’s To Like...

     If a book about Philosophy sounds dull and boring to you, you need to give this one a try.  Peter Cave presents 33 issues for your contemplation, and guides you through the thought processes for both the “pro” and “con” position on each one.  Yes, he starts each chapter with a somewhat whimsical setting.  But don’t be fooled, they serve to open the door to some serious questions such as :

    Would we be happy if we were immortal?

    Should art ever be censored?

    Is there anything God couldn’t know?

    Should women be free to wear the niqab?  And of course…

    Can llamas (or any other animals) ever truly fall in love?

    A wide variety of categories are tackled – Ethics, Law, Politics, Emotions, Knowledge, Logic, Religion, Metaphysics – just to name a few.  Peter Cave lists the category at the start of each chapter, and shuffles the themes deftly from chapter to chapter so that none of them gets stale. 

    There are some neat cartoons scattered throughout the book, and Cave gives references and sources for further reading in a couple appendices at the back.  For me, the length the chapters (6 or 7 pages), as well as the book itself, was just right.  But if you find yourself craving more, the author has several more books to stimulate your brain, including What’s Wrong With Eating People? and Can A Robot Be Human?  As with anthologies, I found it worked best to read 2 or 3 of these chapters at a time; it kept the subject matter fresh and thought-provoking.

    FWIW, my favorite chapters were :

    01) Someone Else Will

    03) The Violinist – Should You Unplug?

    14) Indoctrination : When Believing goes Wrong

    19) Addicted To Love (the Llamas chapter)

    29) A knowing God knows how much?

    32) Life Without End : Too Much of a Good Thing?

   YMMV.

Kewlest New Word. . .

Akrasia (n.) : the state of mind in which someone acts against their better judgment through weakness of will.

Excerpts...

    Osbert is in love just with Penelope, but Penelope is in love just with Quentin.  Osbert is a philosopher.  Quentin is not.  Is a philosopher in love with a non-philosopher?  (Is the answer ‘Yes’, ‘No’, or ‘Cannot Tell’?  See the comments for the answer.)  (pg. xvi)

    Bertrand Russell’s works once suggested that he believed solipsism was true.  An American lady wrote to him, saying how pleased she was to learn that he was a solipsist, and how “I am one too.”  If that causes a teeny smile, then we know what solipsism is.  Of course, whether the American lady was foolish or satirical – well, that we do not know.  (pg. 1984)

’Tis better to be a dissatisfied Socrates than a satisfied pig.  (pg.  220)

    I came across Do Llamas Fall In Love? by accident – I did a Google Image search on two completely unrelated words – “Llamas” and “Existentialism”, and up popped a jpeg of the book’s cover.

    Getting a hard copy of the book turned out to be quite the challenge.  Yes, it is available as a Kindle download, but it costs $10, which I felt was a tad steep for a 223-page book by an author I was unacquainted with.  The (local) Phoenix Library didn’t have a copy, so I was forced to learn how to request an Inter-Library Loan.  It took a month for the library to obtain a copy (it came all the way from San Antonio), but they were successful and I do appreciate their efforts.

    9 Stars.  My only quibble with this book is that the “Logic” chapters were unconvincing.  But I’m a chemist, and we scientists are good at determining the logic behind a set of tests and the data they generate.  Do Llamas Fall In Love? was a delightful, thought-provoking read.  And the good news is that my local library has a copy of Can A Robot Be Human?

The Tortoise Shell Code - V. Frank Asaro

    2012; 400 pages.  New Author? : Yes.  Genre : Legal Thriller, Philosophy.  Overall Rating : 2½*/10.

     Attorney Anthony Darren stands accused of arranging for the Sea Diva, a friend’s tuna boat, to be scuttled while at sea in order to collect the insurance money.  Admittedly, there is some circumstantial evidence, along with some false testimony.  But surely the American judicial system will correctly find him innocent, won’t it?

What’s To Like...

    The plotline is easy to follow, and you don’t have to worry about figuring out whodunit.  If you’re looking for the answer to Life, you might find it here.

What’s Not To Like...

    The book cover implies that this is an Action-Adventure tale, and for the first third of the book, it shows some promise of doing that.  But just when you’re ready for some studly protagonist to start investigating the sinking, the story changes into a Grisham-wannabee.  I don’t do Grisham books.

     But count your blessings, because from there it degenerates into the author’s self-promotion of his pet philosophy – something he calls “co-opetition”, a portmanteau (I always wanted to use that word in a review) of “cooperation” and “competition”.  I don’t do philosophy books.

    The writing is weak. All the plot twists are telegraphed, so the story never develops any tension.  There are some awkward similes (“Hal rapped his knuckles on Anthony’s desk and cocked his head like a raptor tracking prey”).  The court trials are unbelievable, which is exacerbated by the author’s claim that he is an attorney.   Worst of all are the abundant YFKM’s (You’re f**king kidding me!), incredible coincidences that will have you rolling your eyes again and again.

Kewlest New Word...

    Palliation : the making of a crime less grave and less reprehensible.

Excerpt...

    “I just wish I could be there but sometimes the eagle flies and empty the aerie lies.”
    “What’s that mean?” she asked.
    He looked down the length of the corridor, at all the barred doors of the “houses,” the grimy tiles, the hand-printed walls.  And, eventually, a closed and locked door.  “Nothing,” he said.  “Just one of those little quotes I picked up along the way.”   (loc. 6442 )

Kindle Details...

    I bought The Tortoise Shell Code for $9.99 at Amazon.  The paperback version is $24.95.

“A theory that explains everything explains nothing.”  (loc. 4795)

    V. Frank Asaro has another book at Amazon, titled “Universal Co-opetition: Nature’s Fusion of Competition and Cooperation”.  It is non-fiction, and came out about 10 months before The Tortoise Shell Code.  The latter (I assume) touts the same principles as given in the former, but with a piece of fiction thrown in on top for entertainment value.

     I suspect that TTSC is one of those books that an author writes strictly for himself.  Mr. Asaro postulates that co-opetition can be used to solve all the problems of the world, and explain everything from art and music to something which still eludes the brightest physicists of our day - the Grand Unification Theory of Quantum Mechanics.  Really.  I am not making this up.

     Personally, I ascribe to Douglas Adams’ theory that “42” is the answer to life, the Universe, and everything else.  So I can only rate this 2½ Stars.  But if you happen to know the author (or are him) add another 5 stars.