PHILOSOPHY A

One of the several grievances against Philosophy A is the failure of the course to fulfill its designation in the University Catalogue as a "History of Philosophy."

For an introduction to European philosophy, it puts too much emphasis on six great men--Plato, Aristotle, or Marcus Aurelius in the ancient world, Thomas Aquinas in the medieval, and Bacon, Schophenhauer, or Hegel in the modern, to name but a handful of brilliant minds outside the scope of the course. With too much time devoted to men of the past, there is no room for anything beyond Kant, with the result that the student gets the idea that philosophy ends at the opening of the nineteenth century. He knows nothing of Spencer or Nietzche or of contemporary schools, and so is given little which is of value in trying to understand present-day thought.

There is the further fault that the six important figures are studied not in relation to the history of thought or as the products of their eras, but too much as individual, isolated minds. In attempting to understand the significance of a man's thought one must know something of the period and environment which that thought reflects. But only the sketchiest historical background is given in the lectures and there is none in the reading.

Lectures now are devoted almost entirely to the expounding and elucidation of the texts read. This makes it easier for the student but less profitable to his knowledge of European philosophy. That time would be better used in the consideration of historical backgrounds and the progress of philosophy, while the reading should be redistributed to include at least commentaries on other men than the six now emphasized.

There is the further fault that the six important figures are studied not in relation to the history of thought or as the products of their eras, but too much as individual, isolated minds. In attempting to understand the significance of a man's thought one must know something of the period and environment which that thought reflects. But only the sketchiest historical background is given in the lectures and there is none in the reading.

Lectures now are devoted almost entirely to the expounding and elucidation of the texts read. This makes it easier for the student but less profitable to his knowledge of European philosophy. That time would be better used in the consideration of historical backgrounds and the progress of philosophy, while the reading should be redistributed to include at least commentaries on other men than the six now emphasized.