Post Number:#31 May 1st, 2012, 11:31 am
Spectrum wrote:Prismatic wrote:Russell's criticism of Nietzsche in the History of Western Philosophy is uncharacteristically harsh and petty, I'm not quite sure why, but it might be the time it was written when the war was fresh in his mind and German philosophers were not the thing.
I quote Russell (on the positives) very often. IMO, Russell severe critique of almost all the non-analytic philosophers is due to his (and those of the likes) extreme mental proclivity for logic and maths.
You may be right to attribute Russell's uncharitable views of Nietzsche to his "mental proclivity for logic and maths." I wonder if he would make his criticism now with the same force since analytic philosophy has lost some of its lustre.
When you look at the two large volumes of Russell and Whitehead today, it is practically unreadable even by mathematicians and logicians. It's hierarchical point of view is not popular. It seems far too elaborate a scheme. It was Russell's last effort as a pure mathematician— it seems to have exhausted him. It sits on the shelf as a monument to the wrong way of doing things, another dead end in the maze.
Everywhere I have sought peace and never found it except in a corner with a book. —Thomas à Kempis