Scan barcode
Reviews
Heretikler: Modern Felsefenin Harika (Ve Tehlikeli) Başlangıçları by Abdullah Yılmaz, Steven Nadler
jmrprice's review against another edition
3.0
Diving into an exploration of philosophy - the thought is, perhaps, dry, dull, dreary. This work is anything but! Especially since it presents the concepts concisely and precisely along with bits of humor, irreverent wit, and whimsy that can only be delivered through through graphic illustration. This charming book is full of graphics - just not what you may be used to thinking about.
thesagereader's review against another edition
challenging
funny
informative
lighthearted
reflective
fast-paced
4.0
I enjoyed. Will read again I think.
sydneyrp143's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
informative
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
5.0
sr_yancey's review against another edition
It was good for what it tried to be. These philosophies sometimes need visual depictions to really understand what they’re arguing. Philosophy can be overly complicated (and elitist) so this was a much more accessible text and compiled many philosophers from the time.
But I have yet to be convinced as to why I should care. It doesn’t really matter to me whether or not the senses and physics are entirely separate. I’ve got my silly little tasks to do. The realities that consume my everyday life don’t change if I think this is the best possible world or not. I still have to live in whatever world this is. I’m not saying I couldn’t be convinced to care, but for now, reading elaborate essays by crusty white men with too much time on their hands as most of them were in exile (I have thoughts about that, too) just doesn’t interest me. Let me know when we’re talking about philosophers outside of the 1700s.
The title references the ways organized religion feared and censured different schools of thought. Why didn’t it go into that more? I’d be interested in patterns of silencing dissent, or why most of the philosophers here were exiled when so many others were straight up murdered or didn’t have the luxury of “philosophizing”, publishing, and/or debating these ideas. Again, that’s not what this book was trying to do. Touched on it briefly at the end, but it was mostly a composition of philosophers, their ideas, and how one idea built on others as they criticized each other. So if you’re looking for an accessible (and fun) introduction to 1700s philosophy, this is great.