Rating: 
Summary: Makes it easy for the non-genius to understand
Review: I got this book for Christmas and I read the first five essays in two days, it was a very good read. The book has a way of relating the concepts of philosophy to the life in Springfield and by making that association it is easier to understand what is going on. By discussing Aristotle using Homer as an example and moral values by using Marge and Flanders, I was able to pick up the concepts a lot better. So now, when I sit in my college philosophy course I can think back to what I read and I realize that I already have a good grasp of the concepts because of the book. There are some slow parts toward the end, but it is an overall interesting book for anyone who is interested in both The Simpsons and Philosophy as the title suggests.
Rating: 
Summary: Philosophy Minor but Major Simpson Fan
Review: I had not taken any college philosophy courses in about a year and the essays in this book brought it all back to me. It is not a book that says "All I ever needed to know I learned on the Simpsons" but instead it applies philosophy to the Simpsons. It was a fun read as I was able to tie both my philosophy minor and my love of the Simpsons into one. It is not a dumb read, nor is it too educated. (I averaged a C in all my college philosophy classes and I understood it!) I recommend it to anyone who is a Simpsons fan whether or not you enjoy philosophy.
Rating:
Summary: It's refreshing to see philosophers put to good work!
Review: I have been a Simpsons fan from the get-go. I watched the very first episode, the Christmas Special, in the lounge of my freshman dorm, and I have been an enthusiast ever since. The D'oh of Homer, edited by Irwin et al., is an organic product of the attraction the show has to the brainy among us. The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D'oh of Homer is compilation of Simpsonian essays written by working philosophers (as far as I can tell, "working philosopher" is an oxymoron) on various subjects. The text is divided among four sections: The Characters, Themes, Ethics and The Simpsons and Philosophers. I would propose a secondary classification scheme as well: (1) those essays that use familiar Simpsons personalities and situations as examples within a discussion of philosophical ideas and (2) those that try to extrapolate philosophical meaning from the show itself. The chapters that I found most enjoyable where those of the former type, the ones that (re)introduced various ethical philosophies or values of critical commentary using the Simpsons to support their positions. Those essays about Nietzsche, American anti-intellectualism, allusion (a topic especially relevant to the Simpsons), and television's sexual politics were among my favorites. There were some real stinkers, too. A few of the authors of these collected essays seemed to think that a TV show should present a consistent philosophy, which the Simpsons clearly does not. Overall, I would recommend The Simpsons and Philosophy. For people who have never even thought about philosophy, this book would, in many respects, be a worthwhile introduction. However, as de Tocqueville predicted, some in our democracy will not appreciate such high browed pursuits, even when directed to a cartoon.
Rating:
Summary: Insight to America most loveable disfunctional family!
Review: I read a review that said this book sucks the fun out of the show and that it wasn't funny. That's an oppinion and that's fine. But I strongly disagree. After reading the book I've found the show to be much more enjoyable. The essay about Homer and Aristotle had me trying to contain my laughter as I was reading it in an airport terminal. These authors aren't looking for deeper meaning in the Simpsons, just comparing them with some of the greatest philosophical ideas and it makes for a really amusing read.
Rating:
Summary: The Buying of this Book and Philosophy
Review: I recieved this as a Christmas present not really knowing what I was in for. I thought, this will be something nice to read with tea in the morning or something- so I decided to read. Sorry, couldn't stop. Whether or not the philosophical aspects of the Simpsons mentioned in the book were intentional or not the book is quite an englightening expierence. Many may disagree on this but I found much of this book to be a large philosophy lesson using the Simpsons as a sort of demo reel. So it dosent really come down to whether or not you're a Simpsons fan, just whether you like philosophy or not. In my opinion- give it a read.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing
Review: I was not terribly impressed by this book. The problem is not that I'm not a fan of "The Simpsons"; I watch that show in reruns just about every day. The problem is not that I don't find philosophy interesting; I own about 40 books on philosophy and tend to spend a lot of my spare time reading them. I gave the first book in this series (_Seinfeld and Philosophy_) 4 stars. The authors of that book had meaningful things to say about the philosophical aspects of "Seinfeld", but they seemed to think it would be hilarious if they liberally and randomly inserted phrases like "not that there's anything wrong with that" into their essays, and that got old really quick. (To get an idea how annoying this can be, think of your acquaintances who can't seem to carry on a conversation without repeating dialogue from _Monty Python and the Holy Grail_.) In _The Simpsons and Philosophy_, the editors have managed to keep the cuteness under control, but the authors don't establish too many non-obvious connections between philosophy and the show. Part of the problem is that some of them don't seem to be very familiar with the program and with popular culture, in general. For example, the author of one essay asserts that Maude Flanders was killed at a football game and that the running character on the old Letterman show was the "equalizer guy", and seems unaware that the song "Jazzman" that was featured in the episode about the death of Bleeding Gums Murphy was an old Carole King hit. Another essay reveals the shocking fact that "The Simpsons" does not, to the essay's author's dismay, push a consistent Marxist agenda. Several of the essays make only tangential and superficial reference to the Simpsons. It's hard to suppress the impression that many of the authors are junior faculty members who jumped at the chance to pad their CV's by taking an old essay of theirs and dressing it up with token reference to the Simpsons. There is also an essay or two that reads like another Alan Sokal parody.
Rating:
Summary: The best book I've ever read!
Review: I've got a motto; Like the Simpsons, Love Philosophy.
Rating:
Summary: pop culture doesn't get any better than the Simpsons
Review: If it weren't for the Simpsons, I wouldn't have anything useful on TV to watch. And given the high intellegence that goes into writing the show, what more could one ask for. I've always known there was an underlying meaning to the simpsons, and this is a great book to start exploring it. Just about every great philosopher is quoted in reation to one, or several simpsons characters. And it isn't limited to the nuclear family, but the entire town. I reccomend this book for both simpsons fans and students of pop culture. this should be a required reading (and viewing) for every humanities course taught int he US.
Rating:
Summary: Not a funny book
Review: If you are a fanatic of all things Springfield, then nothing I say will dissuade you from reading this book. For the Simpsons viewer or trivia buff, the stance of the Simpsons is secondary to philosophy in this book. If you want to try to understand some philosophical ideas with examples from the Simpsons, then this book is for you. By and large, the writers of this book are fans of the show. Although they quote a bit, their quotes are not always correct, and this may detract from enjoyment. For instance, the argument that Marge is an example of the virtuous person was made. It mentions several instances to support this, but the writer of that essay does not address the episodes that show her gambling addiction. Without knowing if the episode came out before or after the essay, I don't know if this is a simple error or not. Some of the material is quite dense, and the relation to the Simpsons is not direct. The last essay explaining Heidegger and postulating that Bart may be considered a "Heideggerian" has some very complex ideas. This is not always bad. The essay talking of signifiers and the signified (Roland Barthes) actually made the ideas a little easier to understand. I remember going the S/Z many years ago. Giving me an example from a Simpsons episode was very helpful. From the subtitle, I thought there would be more Eastern philosophy, but alas, there was not a whole lot of mention. The philosophers covered are primarily Western. I don't think that I would recommend this to Simpsons fans because they already know that the show is funny and needs to be seen repeatedly to get all the gags. I would recommend this to beginning philosophy students. Have fun!
Rating: 
Summary: A little dry for my taste
Review: If you are a student of philosophy and know what logical positivism is and who Immanuel Kant was, then you will enjoy this. If you are just a Simpsons buff, probably not.
| 
