Rating: 
Summary: An Excellent Textbook
Review: W. T. Jones' first volume, The Classical Mind, is a fantastic introduction for studying ancient philosophy. His work is fairly clear and not very difficult in terms of being able to understand his explication of various philosophers and theories. That is, Jones does not write to other philosophers; he is writing to would-be philosophers or students. Jones considers important aspects such as the timing and events surrounding the philosophical theories in order to demonstrate that these ideas do not develop ex nihilo. They arise because of important questions or issues developed in the relevant cultures. This work covers quite a few people. Of course, it is not exhaustive on every thinker; nor is such even possible since many of the writings of people like the pre-socratics do not exist beyond a few manuscripts. In any case, Jones starts with them (specificaly Homer and Hesiod), through Thales, to Plato, to Aristotle, and up to the skeptics (e.g., Carneades and Sextus). From time to time, Jones will comment upon some of the positive and negative (or implausible) aspects of each of the theories provided. Sometimes his objections are good; other times, they can be answered. For instance, Jones treats Plato's argument for the Forms as a transcendental argument and he applies Stephan Korner's uniquness argument against Plato (c.f. Korner, "The Impossibility of Transcendental Deductions"). Jones doesn't refer to Korner, but it is the same point. I think Plato could *in principle* answer Jones. There are a couple areas where I think that Jones has misinterpreted some of the early thinkers. For instance, Jones treats Aristotle as only holding to the intellectual virtues as being eudaimonia (for an alternative view, see Cooper, John M. "Reason and Human Good in Aristotle"). Also, Jones gives a traditional analysis of Parmenides. Patricia Curd offers an alternative analysis in "The Legacy of Parmenides." Both of these thinkers challenge the traditional views that Jones sides with. In any case, that's a head's up for readers who have not done exhaustive reading on these philosophers; just something to keep in mind when reading Jones. Finally, I think that Jones often uses far too long of quotes from other people. At one point, he quoted Plato for an entire three pages (8 size font!). Jones could have summarized the point and added a footnote. Nevertheless, this is a great textbook for studying ancient philosophy and it deserves five stars despite my harsh disapproval of some of his analyses and writing style :)
Rating:
Summary: An Excellent Textbook
Review: W. T. Jones' first volume, The Classical Mind, is a fantastic introduction for studying ancient philosophy. His work is fairly clear and not very difficult in terms of being able to understand his explication of various philosophers and theories. That is, Jones does not write to other philosophers; he is writing to would-be philosophers or students. Jones considers important aspects such as the timing and events surrounding the philosophical theories in order to demonstrate that these ideas do not develop ex nihilo. They arise because of important questions or issues developed in the relevant cultures. This work covers quite a few people. Of course, it is not exhaustive on every thinker; nor is such even possible since many of the writings of people like the pre-socratics do not exist beyond a few manuscripts. In any case, Jones starts with them (specificaly Homer and Hesiod), through Thales, to Plato, to Aristotle, and up to the skeptics (e.g., Carneades and Sextus). From time to time, Jones will comment upon some of the positive and negative (or implausible) aspects of each of the theories provided. Sometimes his objections are good; other times, they can be answered. For instance, Jones treats Plato's argument for the Forms as a transcendental argument and he applies Stephan Korner's uniquness argument against Plato (c.f. Korner, "The Impossibility of Transcendental Deductions"). Jones doesn't refer to Korner, but it is the same point. I think Plato could *in principle* answer Jones. There are a couple areas where I think that Jones has misinterpreted some of the early thinkers. For instance, Jones treats Aristotle as only holding to the intellectual virtues as being eudaimonia (for an alternative view, see Cooper, John M. "Reason and Human Good in Aristotle"). Also, Jones gives a traditional analysis of Parmenides. Patricia Curd offers an alternative analysis in "The Legacy of Parmenides." Both of these thinkers challenge the traditional views that Jones sides with. In any case, that's a head's up for readers who have not done exhaustive reading on these philosophers; just something to keep in mind when reading Jones. Finally, I think that Jones often uses far too long of quotes from other people. At one point, he quoted Plato for an entire three pages (8 size font!). Jones could have summarized the point and added a footnote. Nevertheless, this is a great textbook for studying ancient philosophy and it deserves five stars despite my harsh disapproval of some of his analyses and writing style :)
| 
