Enhanced descriptions from Syndetics:

Why should anybody take an interest in philosophy? Is it just another detailed study like metallurgy? Or is it similar to history, literature and even religion: a study meant to do some personal good and influence our lives? "Engaging and accessible, this vigorous swansong exemplifies many of Midgley's virtues, and revisits many of her favourite themes." - The Tablet In her last published work, Mary Midgley addresses provocative questions, interrogating the various forms of our current intellectual anxieties and confusions and how we might deal with them. In doing so, she provides a robust, yet not uncritical, defence of philosophy and the life of the mind.This defence is expertly placed in the context of contemporary debates about science, religion, and philosophy. It asks whether, in light of rampant scientific and technological developments, we still need philosophy to help us think about the big questions of meaning, knowledge, and value.

Reviews provided by Syndetics

CHOICE Review

The cover of Midgley's What Is Philosophy For? displays illustrations of insects and flowers, evoking the classic "Golden Guide" series of pocket nature guides designed for new readers. This facade is broken on page 2, as Midgley (who taught at Newcastle Univ., UK, and died at 99, just as this volume was being published) seeks to explain philosophy by analogy to the quantum theory of light, noting the difficulty of understanding light because it behaves as both particles and waves. Philosophy is a discipline concerned with resolving (apparent) confusion about foundational concepts, and whereas wave-particle duality is itself philosophically interesting, introducing the discipline of philosophy through quantum mechanics is an odd move. Written in the Continental tradition, the text comprises 24 (mostly) brief chapters, presented in four uneven parts. Midgley does a fair job of addressing perennial criticisms of philosophy--from the difficulty of assessing philosophical progress, to subjectivism, to unfavorable comparisons to natural philosophy/science. But this is not an introduction to philosophy; rather it is an esoteric response to "some professional philosophers" (as the author writes in her conclusion), a criticism of meta-philosophical theories held by a relative few and mentioned merely in passing. Summing Up: Optional. Researchers. --William Simkulet, Mid Michigan Community College