A History of Western Philosophy

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1945

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Book 1, Part 1Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Part 1 Summary: “The Pre-Socratics”

Chapter 1 Summary: “The Rise of Greek Civilization”

“Pre-Socratics” is the name given by historians to the earliest group of Greek philosophers, who lived about a hundred years before Socrates. In this chapter, Russell summarizes the rise of Greek civilization that prepared the way for the philosophers.

The rise of civilization in Greece was “sudden” and spectacular, leading to accomplishments in art, literature, mathematics, science, and philosophy. This development started with the invention of writing in Egypt c. 4000 BCE, which evolved from pictograms (still used today in Chinese) to alphabetic writing. The Egyptians were the source of much of Western civilization. They had a polytheistic, fertility-based religion, worshiped an absolute monarch, and developed agriculture extensively. Certain themes in Western religion, including beliefs about the soul, death, and immortality, have their origin in Egypt and in Babylonia, another major ancient civilization.

The immediate predecessors of Greek civilization were the Cretans, Minoans, and Myceneans, all of them clustered on the Greek islands. The first notable product of mainland Greek civilization was the semi-legendary poet Homer, whose works became a revered institution and were used as classical texts for Athenian youth to learn.

In Greece, religion evolved into forms that seem more familiar to modern society. Several strains of religion existed, including the cults associated with the gods Dionysus, Bacchus, Orpheus, and the Olympians. Russell claims that the “profound mysticism” that arose from these cults influenced both subsequent religion and philosophy, including Christianity. In particular, beliefs in a dying and rising god and in communal rites of worship prepared the way for the Christian sacraments.

Russell considers the development of civilization in general to be dependent upon the development of prudence or forethought, by which a person is willing to “endure present pains for the sake of future pleasures” (15). This habit of character is developed through agriculture and inculcated by “law, custom, and religion” (15).

At the same time, the qualities of passion and abandonment—as seen in the religious cult of Bacchus—are important counterweights to sober prudence. As civilization developed, human beings realized that they needed both science and art, reason and emotion. This contrast can be seen in the Greek philosophers themselves: some were more scientific or rational, others more poetic or mystical. These dichotomies appear again and again in Western culture.

Chapter 2 Summary: “The Milesian School”

Greek philosophy is generally considered to begin with Thales (c. 624-c. 548 BCE), who was a member of the Milesian School, a group of philosophers based in the city of Miletus in Ionia, Asia Minor. Thales’s inquiries revolved around the physical universe, and he is often considered to be the originator of science. He is believed to have traveled in Egypt, where he learned geometry and brought it to Greece. Most of the information about Thales comes from Aristotle. According to Aristotle, Thales believed that “water is the original substance, out of which all others are formed” (26). Russell sees this as a germinal scientific hypothesis, and although it now seems wrongheaded, it is “by no means a foolish one” (26) and should be respected as an early attempt at empirical science, which in time would “stimulate both thought and observation” (26).

The other members of the Milesian School were Anaximander and Anaximenes, who continued the curiosity and speculation about the physical universe inaugurated by Thales. Notably, Anaximenes hypothesized that the “fundamental substance” is air and that the world is shaped like a disc. Russell concludes that the Milesian School is important “not for what it achieved, but for what it attempted” (28), for asking important questions, and for bringing Greek thought into contact with outside influences including Babylonia and Egypt.

Chapter 3 Summary: “Pythagoras”

Russell characterizes Pythagoras (c. 570-c. 500 BCE) as “intellectually one of the most important men who ever lived” (29). Pythagoras represents a blending of the mystical and scientific traditions in Greek thought: In addition to being a religious sage, Pythagoras was also a mathematician. He “discovered the importance of numbers in music” (35) and conceived of the universe as pervaded by the concept of number. He also theorized about the properties of triangles and other aspects of geometry that are still considered valid. Russell considers Pythagoras most significant in combining the mathematical desire for “exact truth” with theology and spiritual concerns, a combination which would continue in the Western tradition.

Chapter 4 Summary: “Heraclitus”

Heraclitus (c. 540-480 BCE) was, like the members of the Milesian School, from Ionia. He believed that fire is the fundamental element and that all things are in flux, with unity in the universe being “formed by the combination of opposites” (41). All things come out of the One, which is God. He held harsh ethical views that regarded human beings as naturally evil, believing that only force would make them act justly; accordingly, he believed that war is a fundamental force in the world which causes change.

Heraclitus is significant in inaugurating speculations about the nature of time, permanence, and change that would preoccupy many Western poets and thinkers. Heraclitus’s claim that there is no stability or permanence has been troubling and has led thinkers to use science and philosophy to find something eternal in the universe.

Chapter 5 Summary: “Parmenides”

Parmenides (born c. 515 BCE) invented a “metaphysics based on logic” (48) that would remain influential in much subsequent Western philosophy. This included making arguments “from thought and language to the world at large” (49), a notable departure in Greek philosophy. Parmenides speculated on the nature of ultimate reality, God, and knowledge (including memory). He came to the opposite conclusion from Heraclitus, denying that change exists at all because what he called “substance”—an important concept in much subsequent philosophy—is indestructible.

Chapter 6 Summary: “Empedocles”

Much like Pythagoras, Empedocles (c. 490-430 BCE) was a “mixture of philosopher, prophet, man of science, and charlatan” (53). He established earth, air, fire, and water as the four elements and believed that the earth is a sphere. Like Pythagoras, Empedocles’s science was mixed with religious and mystical elements; he believed himself to be a god. Empedocles explained change as a struggle between the principles of love and strife and regarded nature as “regulated by chance and necessity rather than by purpose” (58).

Chapter 7 Summary: “Athens in Relation to Culture”

The rise of Athens as the center of Greek culture was largely the result of their victory in the Persian Wars. As a result of these victories, Athens gained naval supremacy and became rich under the leadership of Pericles. Indeed, “the age of Pericles was the happiest and most glorious time in the history of Athens” (58) and included the period of great dramatists, poets, and philosophers.

Chapter 8 Summary: “Anaxagoras”

Anaxagoras (c. 500-428 BCE) was responsible for introducing philosophy into Athens. He continued the “scientific, rationalist” tradition of Greek philosophy. Whereas earlier philosophers posited various material elements as the basis of the universe, Anaxagoras believed that the fundamental substance was mind (nous), which causes all motion and change. Anaxagoras was a direct influence on Socrates.

Chapter 9 Summary: “The Atomists”

Leucippus (c. 5th century) and his pupil Democritus (c. 460-c. 370 BCE) were the founders of atomism, or the theory that matter is made up of small particles called atoms. This view would resurface and attain more importance in the early modern period with Newton and, later, with Einstein. Democritus took atomism to the point of materialism, positing that matter is all that exists and that thought itself is a physical process.

Chapter 10 Summary: “Protagoras”

Protagoras (c. 490-c. 420 BCE) introduced skepticism into Greek philosophy in the form of Sophism. Originally, a sophist meant simply a teacher of philosophy; it was only later that it acquired the negative connotation of someone who uses faulty reasoning.

The sophists catered to the wealthy class in Athens. Protagoras taught the young people of Athens how to live a virtuous life; however, like Socrates he was convicted of impiety and eventually exiled from Athens. Because the sophists were “prepared to follow an argument wherever it might lead them” (78), they frequently adopted positions skeptical of conventional beliefs, including beliefs about the gods. The sophists focused on the art of argumentation and were prepared to argue for either side in a debate; for this reason, they were often perceived as lacking convictions of their own and being “frivolous and immoral” (78).

Protagoras’s demise coincided with the death of Pericles and the onset of a “darker period in Athenian history” (80) including military loss, political unrest, and plague.

Book 1, Part 1 Analysis

In Part 1 of Book 1, Russell is concerned with situating the origins of philosophy in ancient Greece, and in particular with the group of philosophers known as the Pre-Socratics. Russell stakes a claim that among these philosophers, Pythagoras was the single most influential person in the history of thought (37). Although the Pre-Socratics made a number of mistakes about the physical world, according to Russell, they asked the right questions—for this reason, they are important and worth studying.

In rating the Pre-Socratics highly, Russell shows his bias in favor of science and forms of philosophy that are “scientific” in nature. In fact, Russell argues that the scientific and experimental spirit of the Pre-Socratics became submerged as the more mystical attitude of Socrates and Plato succeeded it. Science would only reemerge as a major theme in the early modern period, many centuries later. Throughout the book, Russell shows how threads in the philosophical narrative often disappear and reappear.

Although Russell uses the terms “philosophy” and “science” throughout the book, he does not address the history of these terms in detail, mentioning only briefly on Page 3 that philosophy and science were not originally separate concepts. What is known today as science, or the investigation of the physical universe, was in ancient times called “natural philosophy.” The term “philosophy,” meaning “love of wisdom” in Greek, originally included inquiries into most branches of knowledge. It was not until the early modern period that “science” (originally a word meaning simply “knowledge,” from the Latin scientia) came to denote exclusively the study of the physical world and that separate scientific disciplines (e.g., physics, astronomy, biology) began to develop. It was at this time that philosopher and scientist gradually became different occupations, although right into the 19th century a number of thinkers combined investigation into ethics, metaphysics, and even theology with the study of physical science.

At the end of Chapter 7, Russell depicts the emperor Justinian’s closing of the Academy, founded by Plato, as the end of the Athenian philosophical tradition due to religious bigotry. However, some more recent historians have argued that Justinian’s action was due to causes other than religious fanaticism or opposition to philosophy. This passage presents another instance of Russell’s antireligious bias in that he appears to draw a direct link between the closure of the Academy and the onset of the European Dark Ages; in reality, the Dark Ages had multiple causes on a number of social, political, and economic fronts.