Pragmatism

A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking

De: William James, Sofia Pisou

Narrado por: Moe Egan

Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking by William James is a unique work in American philosophy. This collection of lectures James himself delivered at the dawn of the twentieth century has been a landmark in the development of the philosophical movement of pragmatism. This summary includes a biography, a key synopsis, and an insightful analysis of the main distinctive points of pragmatism as a mediating system opposed to rationalism and empiricism, the dominant philosophies of that era. Suitable for students and any reader interested in clarifying the basic notions of absolute monism and empirical pluralism and in studying the critical approach to old systems of thought by one of the founders of pragmatism, William James.

Includes:

• A brief background of the author and the work
• Overview, synopsis, and analysis
• Historical context, criticisms, and social impact
• Chapter-by-chapter summary
• The full narration of the text

This audiobook is suitable for students and anyone interested in contemporary philosophy.

©2015 AudioLearn (P)2015 AudioLearn

Original W. James’ Pragmatism put to Words

A fine rebuke of the pretensions of both Nominalism and Rationalism, presenting a fine middle way that actually can get you somewhere and got us somewhere (eg SS Benedicta of the Cross & JPII Phenomenology) without sacrificing the truths and morality of the Religious & meaningful life.

Great book, badly read

I recommend James's book as such. However, the reader (Moe Egan) doesn't do a very good job: in several parts she repeats words and e.g. in the introduction talks about William JONES. Her speech sounds synthesised and she doesn't sound like she understands what she's reading. The recording of "Pluralistic Universe" is much better.

Great content, difficult narration

James is excellent, obviously. This is a classic of American philosophy. A collection of lectures, it’s very approachable, engaging and minimally technical.

The narration had enough mistakes as to be distracting. Mistakes were in speech and pronunciation. I don’t mean to be too harsh. I was still grateful to have it. But it really was distracting at times. With a more challenging text, it would have been even worse.

A book worth listening to more than once

I disagree with some of the reviewers who complained about the reader. I was surprised by their comments. I think she did an excellent job. I do agree that the summaries which were added by the editor did not help . They were presented at the beginning of the text. They were too condensed and too dry to be helpful. I suspect that the reviewers were responding to the reading of the summaries. Maybe the summaries should be heard at the end of each chapter. The book itself is excellent. And the reader did a good job. The big picture is clearly presented in Lectures 5 (Common Sense) and 7 (Humanism). That makes the book slightly difficult to follow. But it is well worth the effort.

"This" does NOT = "Thus"

"Casual" does NOT = "Causal"!!! - EXCEPT in this reading. .. please, Absolute! whether yer 'there' or not 'there'! let Wm Jms have fingers to stopper his ears to this garbling reader!! (did she actually say 'metafiscal'?? aarrgh)

Dreadful Narration

I rarely write reviews, but feel compelled to do so because of the dreadful narration, which makes this important work almost unintelligible, and extremely tiresome to listen to. The narrator clearly has no understanding of the subject matter, or even of the author's name. (At one point she refers to William James as William Jones.) Moreover, she seems to be unable to read ahead as she's speaking, so that her intonation is frequently inappropriate, making the text very difficult to comprehend. At times, she sounds like a computer speaking, and at other times like a 5th grader struggling with the material. In addition, she often mispronounces words; for example she says "sub-summed" instead of "subsumed," and on another occasion, "omni-science" instead of "omniscience." The only good thing I can say about her is that she has a pleasant voice, but this in no way makes up for the horrible performance.