Good introduction, 15 Nov 2008
I read through this book quickly and although I was already familiar with most of the material, I found that it it jogged my memory in a few areas. I have already read quite a lot of philosophy but there were one or two things that I learned from this book.

Nigel Warburton is a senior lecturer in philosophy at the Open University and he has divided this book into seven chapters. Particularly on the section on meta-ethics in his second chapter entitled "Right and Wrong" and the section on falsification in his fifth chapter "Science", I gained some insights into things that I hadn't picked up from reading much larger books. One of the best introductions on the market to a very important but sometimes abstract and obscure subject.

Superb!, 07 Dec 2007
Like 'Philosophy - the classics', this is an excellent book, reference and general reader. It gives a useful reading list at the end of each chapter.

The Basics takes a topic based approach, including Philosophy of : Science, Mind, Religion, the external world etc. and starts off by expounding the theory (say behaviourism) and then the arguments against it.

Warburton writes really clearly and this book is a useful resource for student and anyone interested in Philosophy.


Every philosopher at every level should own this book, 03 Feb 2006
I did a philosophy degree and I remember getting a bit dismayed by some of the books I had to read. Then I stumbled across this. In his introduction he writes that philosophy is often seen as harder than it actually is and this is because many philosophers aren't good writers.

This is 100% true and restored my faith in philosophy. Warburton is an extremely clear writer and covers the essential points is a lucid manner. If it's within the scope of this book then any essay you have to write, or topic you are interested in should begin with this book. Of course you will need others but this is a great starting point.

See also his 'philosophy: a-z' You might also find Bryan Magee's books useful and Bertrand Russell is a bit of a genius too.

EXCELLENT BOOK FOR REVISION, 10 Sep 2002
I have just completed an ethics and philosophy A Level for which I used this book. The book itself is clear and concise, making it excellent revision material. It covers all of the standard need to know topics and does so in an intelligent, factual manner! Definitly use this for A Level standards although I would not reccomend using it as a basis for research as it simply isn't detailed enough.

Great for anyone!, 22 Nov 2001
I have just embarked on a two year philosophy A-Level course and i am using Warburton's book as a stepping stone to discoving many aspects of philosophy. The clarity and use of language makes this book easy for anyone to understand, not just academics. It allows easy access to the world of philosophy unlike so many other books on this topic. Well done Nigel!

Good introduction, 15 Nov 2008
I read through this book quickly and although I was already familiar with most of the material, I found that it it jogged my memory in a few areas. I have already read quite a lot of philosophy but there were one or two things that I learned from this book.

Nigel Warburton is a senior lecturer in philosophy at the Open University and he has divided this book into seven chapters. Particularly on the section on meta-ethics in his second chapter entitled "Right and Wrong" and the section on falsification in his fifth chapter "Science", I gained some insights into things that I hadn't picked up from reading much larger books. One of the best introductions on the market to a very important but sometimes abstract and obscure subject.

Superb!, 07 Dec 2007
Like 'Philosophy - the classics', this is an excellent book, reference and general reader. It gives a useful reading list at the end of each chapter.

The Basics takes a topic based approach, including Philosophy of : Science, Mind, Religion, the external world etc. and starts off by expounding the theory (say behaviourism) and then the arguments against it.

Warburton writes really clearly and this book is a useful resource for student and anyone interested in Philosophy.


Every philosopher at every level should own this book, 03 Feb 2006
I did a philosophy degree and I remember getting a bit dismayed by some of the books I had to read. Then I stumbled across this. In his introduction he writes that philosophy is often seen as harder than it actually is and this is because many philosophers aren't good writers.

This is 100% true and restored my faith in philosophy. Warburton is an extremely clear writer and covers the essential points is a lucid manner. If it's within the scope of this book then any essay you have to write, or topic you are interested in should begin with this book. Of course you will need others but this is a great starting point.

See also his 'philosophy: a-z' You might also find Bryan Magee's books useful and Bertrand Russell is a bit of a genius too.

EXCELLENT BOOK FOR REVISION, 10 Sep 2002
I have just completed an ethics and philosophy A Level for which I used this book. The book itself is clear and concise, making it excellent revision material. It covers all of the standard need to know topics and does so in an intelligent, factual manner! Definitly use this for A Level standards although I would not reccomend using it as a basis for research as it simply isn't detailed enough.

Great for anyone!, 22 Nov 2001
I have just embarked on a two year philosophy A-Level course and i am using Warburton's book as a stepping stone to discoving many aspects of philosophy. The clarity and use of language makes this book easy for anyone to understand, not just academics. It allows easy access to the world of philosophy unlike so many other books on this topic. Well done Nigel!

Compelling? Not really..., 06 Mar 2008
I read Think a year or two after completing a degree in philosophy at Durham, and, sadly, I did not find it compelling. It struck me as the work of a sophisticated expert who enjoys dazzling us with the grip he has on his subject.

Blackburn surely wrote it for the A level student who is thinking of reading philosophy at university, but I fear it may put more readers off philosophy than it will inspire to study it.

The book is conventional, Cartesian, middle-of-the-road, politically correct and safe in its approach. No applecarts are upset and the sceptical questions and challenges are the old, old ones we've heard so often before. European philosophy hardly gets a look in. Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Foucault, Derrida -- none of them are mentioned.

I had the feeling I was tramping over well-trampled ground. The chapters read like university lectures: I did wonder if the whole book had been compiled by cobbling together of the author's well-thumbed lecture notes.

This was probably an easy book to write but in spite of its self-congratulatory title, it is not by any stretch of the imagination compelling.

Worthwhile introduction, 30 Jun 2004
I picked up this book as i wanted a basic introduction to philosophy and the major ideas: I wasnt disappointed. The book is ordered by theme (knowledge, mind, free will, the self, god, ...etc) and goes through a readable account of the development of ideas in each, with long quotations from major philosophers. Within each section, approaches to addressing the theme are explained and dissected plainly. The style is easy to follow and avoids the twisty wordgames of much philosophical writing. Nevertheless the book demands and rewards attention and should be engaging enough for anyone with a modicum of literacy and interest.

Downsides: lack of a further reading list is irritating. Blackburn also ignores pretty much everything thats happened since 1900 (except Wittgenstein and Russell) and avoids much continental philosophy since Kant. The quotes and works of Hume are given a disproportionate regard, given his influence. This may be seen as conservatism from Blackburn, but it does allow him to give the book a brevity which is excellent. However it should be pointed out that Blackburn is intellectually conservative and this sometimes come through in the writing.

This is best read as an introduction to philosophical thinking (as opposed to the history of philosophy) and at the very least, the reader should be able to ask the right question if not come up with the answer.

Please can we have something similar about modern philosophy?

Lives up to it's title - certainly makes you think., 02 Jan 2002
The book is great in that yes, it certainly does make you think long and hard about the subjects at hand. However, rather disturbingly for a book written by a Professor at Cambridge, in one case in particular it made me think that Simon Blackburn had got it wrong. The analysis that Blackburn gives on the nature of interpretation of colour and light is seriously flawed, in that his example of scattering dust on a window to highlight the differences between someone that sees monochromatically as we might (whatever that is!!!) and someone who sees in exact negative does not tally.

His argument that scattering dust would make the image for someone that sees in negative sharper and more detailed is patently wrong, since if the dust is dark, someone seeing it in negative will see it as white and vice versa. How such a mistake occurred in a book that is otherwise well researched is beyond me, but is something that is made note worthy by the fact it is so out of character with the rest of the book.

A good introduction, 12 Dec 2001
This is a good accessible introduction. I would recommend it to anyone approaching the subject for the first time. Unfortunately I was looking for a bit more depth but this is not the fault of the book.

Good Introduction, 27 Sep 2001
This book is well written, and covers most of the important themes in an interesting way. I'd reccomed that you read it in conjuction with another introduction to the subject, in order to gain a more balanced view. My only major problem with this book is it's lack of a 'Further Reading' section.

Good introduction, 15 Nov 2008
I read through this book quickly and although I was already familiar with most of the material, I found that it it jogged my memory in a few areas. I have already read quite a lot of philosophy but there were one or two things that I learned from this book.

Nigel Warburton is a senior lecturer in philosophy at the Open University and he has divided this book into seven chapters. Particularly on the section on meta-ethics in his second chapter entitled "Right and Wrong" and the section on falsification in his fifth chapter "Science", I gained some insights into things that I hadn't picked up from reading much larger books. One of the best introductions on the market to a very important but sometimes abstract and obscure subject.

Superb!, 07 Dec 2007
Like 'Philosophy - the classics', this is an excellent book, reference and general reader. It gives a useful reading list at the end of each chapter.

The Basics takes a topic based approach, including Philosophy of : Science, Mind, Religion, the external world etc. and starts off by expounding the theory (say behaviourism) and then the arguments against it.

Warburton writes really clearly and this book is a useful resource for student and anyone interested in Philosophy.


Every philosopher at every level should own this book, 03 Feb 2006
I did a philosophy degree and I remember getting a bit dismayed by some of the books I had to read. Then I stumbled across this. In his introduction he writes that philosophy is often seen as harder than it actually is and this is because many philosophers aren't good writers.

This is 100% true and restored my faith in philosophy. Warburton is an extremely clear writer and covers the essential points is a lucid manner. If it's within the scope of this book then any essay you have to write, or topic you are interested in should begin with this book. Of course you will need others but this is a great starting point.

See also his 'philosophy: a-z' You might also find Bryan Magee's books useful and Bertrand Russell is a bit of a genius too.

EXCELLENT BOOK FOR REVISION, 10 Sep 2002
I have just completed an ethics and philosophy A Level for which I used this book. The book itself is clear and concise, making it excellent revision material. It covers all of the standard need to know topics and does so in an intelligent, factual manner! Definitly use this for A Level standards although I would not reccomend using it as a basis for research as it simply isn't detailed enough.

Great for anyone!, 22 Nov 2001
I have just embarked on a two year philosophy A-Level course and i am using Warburton's book as a stepping stone to discoving many aspects of philosophy. The clarity and use of language makes this book easy for anyone to understand, not just academics. It allows easy access to the world of philosophy unlike so many other books on this topic. Well done Nigel!

Compelling? Not really..., 06 Mar 2008
I read Think a year or two after completing a degree in philosophy at Durham, and, sadly, I did not find it compelling. It struck me as the work of a sophisticated expert who enjoys dazzling us with the grip he has on his subject.

Blackburn surely wrote it for the A level student who is thinking of reading philosophy at university, but I fear it may put more readers off philosophy than it will inspire to study it.

The book is conventional, Cartesian, middle-of-the-road, politically correct and safe in its approach. No applecarts are upset and the sceptical questions and challenges are the old, old ones we've heard so often before. European philosophy hardly gets a look in. Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Foucault, Derrida -- none of them are mentioned.

I had the feeling I was tramping over well-trampled ground. The chapters read like university lectures: I did wonder if the whole book had been compiled by cobbling together of the author's well-thumbed lecture notes.

This was probably an easy book to write but in spite of its self-congratulatory title, it is not by any stretch of the imagination compelling.

Worthwhile introduction, 30 Jun 2004
I picked up this book as i wanted a basic introduction to philosophy and the major ideas: I wasnt disappointed. The book is ordered by theme (knowledge, mind, free will, the self, god, ...etc) and goes through a readable account of the development of ideas in each, with long quotations from major philosophers. Within each section, approaches to addressing the theme are explained and dissected plainly. The style is easy to follow and avoids the twisty wordgames of much philosophical writing. Nevertheless the book demands and rewards attention and should be engaging enough for anyone with a modicum of literacy and interest.

Downsides: lack of a further reading list is irritating. Blackburn also ignores pretty much everything thats happened since 1900 (except Wittgenstein and Russell) and avoids much continental philosophy since Kant. The quotes and works of Hume are given a disproportionate regard, given his influence. This may be seen as conservatism from Blackburn, but it does allow him to give the book a brevity which is excellent. However it should be pointed out that Blackburn is intellectually conservative and this sometimes come through in the writing.

This is best read as an introduction to philosophical thinking (as opposed to the history of philosophy) and at the very least, the reader should be able to ask the right question if not come up with the answer.

Please can we have something similar about modern philosophy?

Lives up to it's title - certainly makes you think., 02 Jan 2002
The book is great in that yes, it certainly does make you think long and hard about the subjects at hand. However, rather disturbingly for a book written by a Professor at Cambridge, in one case in particular it made me think that Simon Blackburn had got it wrong. The analysis that Blackburn gives on the nature of interpretation of colour and light is seriously flawed, in that his example of scattering dust on a window to highlight the differences between someone that sees monochromatically as we might (whatever that is!!!) and someone who sees in exact negative does not tally.

His argument that scattering dust would make the image for someone that sees in negative sharper and more detailed is patently wrong, since if the dust is dark, someone seeing it in negative will see it as white and vice versa. How such a mistake occurred in a book that is otherwise well researched is beyond me, but is something that is made note worthy by the fact it is so out of character with the rest of the book.

A good introduction, 12 Dec 2001
This is a good accessible introduction. I would recommend it to anyone approaching the subject for the first time. Unfortunately I was looking for a bit more depth but this is not the fault of the book.

Good Introduction, 27 Sep 2001
This book is well written, and covers most of the important themes in an interesting way. I'd reccomed that you read it in conjuction with another introduction to the subject, in order to gain a more balanced view. My only major problem with this book is it's lack of a 'Further Reading' section.

Good Reference, 14 Aug 2002
If you're looking for something in the same style as Warburton's Philosophy: The Basics (which is highly recommended) you may be a bit disappointed in this book. The style is very much more like a dictionary of thinking. Each entry describes a kind of argument or thought pattern and is cross referenced to others. This makes it a bit difficult to read in a lineary fashion but does aid in it's use as a reference tool. 5 stars for content, 3 stars for format.

Clear thinking made clear!, 14 Sep 2000
This book should be compulsory preparation for anyone who has to read the output of politicians, consultants, journalists, pundits or experts in any field.

I have not come across a more accessible guide the the rhetoric, sloppy thinking, and pure sophistry that is evident in much factual analysis and opinion today.

Buy at once!

Useful Glossary of Philosophical Terminology, 19 Aug 2000
Being able to spot poor reasoning and diversionary tactics such as fallacies, gobbledegook, jargon, pseudo-profundity and smokescreens will put more clout behind your arguments and sharpen your thinking. As an introduction to critical thinking, this delightfully concise little book provides some of the basic tools for clear thinking on any issue. The techniques and topics discussed are transferable and can be applied to any area in which clear thought is required: they have direct applications in most academic disciplines and in any facet of life in which people present reasons and evidence in support of conclusions.

Now in its second edition, this book is a set text for the Open University A211 Philosophy and the Human Situation course. It will give you the power to tell a good from a bad argument. Using witty and topical examples, author Nigel Warburton will enable you to distinguish with confidence between a red herring and a straw man. This new edition updates the whole text and includes many new entries, all listed in alphabetical order. However, the next edition should include the following suggested entries: * ergo et sum * I think, therefore I am * Rene Descartes * logic * Betrand Russell * Lateral thinking * Six Thinking Hats * tautology

Good introduction, 15 Nov 2008
I read through this book quickly and although I was already familiar with most of the material, I found that it it jogged my memory in a few areas. I have already read quite a lot of philosophy but there were one or two things that I learned from this book.

Nigel Warburton is a senior lecturer in philosophy at the Open University and he has divided this book into seven chapters. Particularly on the section on meta-ethics in his second chapter entitled "Right and Wrong" and the section on falsification in his fifth chapter "Science", I gained some insights into things that I hadn't picked up from reading much larger books. One of the best introductions on the market to a very important but sometimes abstract and obscure subject.

Superb!, 07 Dec 2007
Like 'Philosophy - the classics', this is an excellent book, reference and general reader. It gives a useful reading list at the end of each chapter.

The Basics takes a topic based approach, including Philosophy of : Science, Mind, Religion, the external world etc. and starts off by expounding the theory (say behaviourism) and then the arguments against it.

Warburton writes really clearly and this book is a useful resource for student and anyone interested in Philosophy.


Every philosopher at every level should own this book, 03 Feb 2006
I did a philosophy degree and I remember getting a bit dismayed by some of the books I had to read. Then I stumbled across this. In his introduction he writes that philosophy is often seen as harder than it actually is and this is because many philosophers aren't good writers.

This is 100% true and restored my faith in philosophy. Warburton is an extremely clear writer and covers the essential points is a lucid manner. If it's within the scope of this book then any essay you have to write, or topic you are interested in should begin with this book. Of course you will need others but this is a great starting point.

See also his 'philosophy: a-z' You might also find Bryan Magee's books useful and Bertrand Russell is a bit of a genius too.

EXCELLENT BOOK FOR REVISION, 10 Sep 2002
I have just completed an ethics and philosophy A Level for which I used this book. The book itself is clear and concise, making it excellent revision material. It covers all of the standard need to know topics and does so in an intelligent, factual manner! Definitly use this for A Level standards although I would not reccomend using it as a basis for research as it simply isn't detailed enough.

Great for anyone!, 22 Nov 2001
I have just embarked on a two year philosophy A-Level course and i am using Warburton's book as a stepping stone to discoving many aspects of philosophy. The clarity and use of language makes this book easy for anyone to understand, not just academics. It allows easy access to the world of philosophy unlike so many other books on this topic. Well done Nigel!

Compelling? Not really..., 06 Mar 2008
I read Think a year or two after completing a degree in philosophy at Durham, and, sadly, I did not find it compelling. It struck me as the work of a sophisticated expert who enjoys dazzling us with the grip he has on his subject.

Blackburn surely wrote it for the A level student who is thinking of reading philosophy at university, but I fear it may put more readers off philosophy than it will inspire to study it.

The book is conventional, Cartesian, middle-of-the-road, politically correct and safe in its approach. No applecarts are upset and the sceptical questions and challenges are the old, old ones we've heard so often before. European philosophy hardly gets a look in. Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Foucault, Derrida -- none of them are mentioned.

I had the feeling I was tramping over well-trampled ground. The chapters read like university lectures: I did wonder if the whole book had been compiled by cobbling together of the author's well-thumbed lecture notes.

This was probably an easy book to write but in spite of its self-congratulatory title, it is not by any stretch of the imagination compelling.

Worthwhile introduction, 30 Jun 2004
I picked up this book as i wanted a basic introduction to philosophy and the major ideas: I wasnt disappointed. The book is ordered by theme (knowledge, mind, free will, the self, god, ...etc) and goes through a readable account of the development of ideas in each, with long quotations from major philosophers. Within each section, approaches to addressing the theme are explained and dissected plainly. The style is easy to follow and avoids the twisty wordgames of much philosophical writing. Nevertheless the book demands and rewards attention and should be engaging enough for anyone with a modicum of literacy and interest.

Downsides: lack of a further reading list is irritating. Blackburn also ignores pretty much everything thats happened since 1900 (except Wittgenstein and Russell) and avoids much continental philosophy since Kant. The quotes and works of Hume are given a disproportionate regard, given his influence. This may be seen as conservatism from Blackburn, but it does allow him to give the book a brevity which is excellent. However it should be pointed out that Blackburn is intellectually conservative and this sometimes come through in the writing.

This is best read as an introduction to philosophical thinking (as opposed to the history of philosophy) and at the very least, the reader should be able to ask the right question if not come up with the answer.

Please can we have something similar about modern philosophy?

Lives up to it's title - certainly makes you think., 02 Jan 2002
The book is great in that yes, it certainly does make you think long and hard about the subjects at hand. However, rather disturbingly for a book written by a Professor at Cambridge, in one case in particular it made me think that Simon Blackburn had got it wrong. The analysis that Blackburn gives on the nature of interpretation of colour and light is seriously flawed, in that his example of scattering dust on a window to highlight the differences between someone that sees monochromatically as we might (whatever that is!!!) and someone who sees in exact negative does not tally.

His argument that scattering dust would make the image for someone that sees in negative sharper and more detailed is patently wrong, since if the dust is dark, someone seeing it in negative will see it as white and vice versa. How such a mistake occurred in a book that is otherwise well researched is beyond me, but is something that is made note worthy by the fact it is so out of character with the rest of the book.

A good introduction, 12 Dec 2001
This is a good accessible introduction. I would recommend it to anyone approaching the subject for the first time. Unfortunately I was looking for a bit more depth but this is not the fault of the book.

Good Introduction, 27 Sep 2001
This book is well written, and covers most of the important themes in an interesting way. I'd reccomed that you read it in conjuction with another introduction to the subject, in order to gain a more balanced view. My only major problem with this book is it's lack of a 'Further Reading' section.

Good Reference, 14 Aug 2002
If you're looking for something in the same style as Warburton's Philosophy: The Basics (which is highly recommended) you may be a bit disappointed in this book. The style is very much more like a dictionary of thinking. Each entry describes a kind of argument or thought pattern and is cross referenced to others. This makes it a bit difficult to read in a lineary fashion but does aid in it's use as a reference tool. 5 stars for content, 3 stars for format.

Clear thinking made clear!, 14 Sep 2000
This book should be compulsory preparation for anyone who has to read the output of politicians, consultants, journalists, pundits or experts in any field.

I have not come across a more accessible guide the the rhetoric, sloppy thinking, and pure sophistry that is evident in much factual analysis and opinion today.

Buy at once!

Useful Glossary of Philosophical Terminology, 19 Aug 2000
Being able to spot poor reasoning and diversionary tactics such as fallacies, gobbledegook, jargon, pseudo-profundity and smokescreens will put more clout behind your arguments and sharpen your thinking. As an introduction to critical thinking, this delightfully concise little book provides some of the basic tools for clear thinking on any issue. The techniques and topics discussed are transferable and can be applied to any area in which clear thought is required: they have direct applications in most academic disciplines and in any facet of life in which people present reasons and evidence in support of conclusions.

Now in its second edition, this book is a set text for the Open University A211 Philosophy and the Human Situation course. It will give you the power to tell a good from a bad argument. Using witty and topical examples, author Nigel Warburton will enable you to distinguish with confidence between a red herring and a straw man. This new edition updates the whole text and includes many new entries, all listed in alphabetical order. However, the next edition should include the following suggested entries: * ergo et sum * I think, therefore I am * Rene Descartes * logic * Betrand Russell * Lateral thinking * Six Thinking Hats * tautology

Perfect introduction, 19 May 2008
This is probably the best introduction available, being lucid and succinct, it also takes just the right approach to the subject for the beginner. Instead of a chapter by chapter guide to the main thinkers or theories, Wolff cleverly structures the book in such a way that the student is gently coaxed into exploring the fundamental questions of political philosophy for himself. The author notes at the beginning that it is sometimes said that 'who gets what?' and 'who says so?' are the only two questions of importance in the subject. Whilst denying this to be entirely the case, Wolff puts these questions firmly into intial context by asking why we need the state at all and then proceeds to ask if we do need the state, who indeed should govern it? He then explores the issue of the distribution of goods before returning to the 'who says who gets what?' and by the end of the book the reader should be able to explore that question through the lenses of the competing theories of today, such as feminism or communitarianism.

I was lucky enough to have the author as one of my lecturers at university and, indeed, to take my tutorials in political philosophy in my final year. As a working class student with little self-esteem and who was failing abjectly to mix within the rarefied air of an elite university, Mr Wolff admirably strived to boost my confidence and his tutorials (and lectures) were a model of patience and clarity. This book is imbubed with these qualities throughout and thus can't be recommended highly enough. Whether you are an a-level student or a 1st year undergrad, this book will have you asking the right questions and position you to look in more detail at the major theories.

Easy to read short intro to political philosophy, 24 Feb 2008
Jonathon Wolff has written an excellent and easy to digest intro to political philosophy. It's not particularly long and doesn't provide an in depth look at many topics. But it covers off the basics and sets out the key ideas and people. He has also used a semi chronological layout which helps give a sense of the way thought has developed over time. A good resource for a student, but certainly readable enough for someone taking a casual interest in the subject area.

A critical but sympathetic guide to the persuasiveness of liberal political philosophy, 09 Sep 2007
Jonathan Wolff defines the territory of political philosophy by reference to the modern distinction between descriptive and normative political study; i.e. a descriptive process entails the collecting and ordering of factual data about politics, a normative process entails reasoned argument to the effect of purporting a theory on which to model politics. The latter normative process is the task of political philosophy.

Whilst an introduction to political philosophy might aspire to be a purely descriptive account of normative arguments (and criticisms), Wolff's book isn't neutral in this respect, assuming throughout a (in his words) `liberal individualist' outlook. As such his starting point in chapter one is the 17th century proto-liberal depiction of the State of Nature, and the pressing need to find a rational basis for political rights and obligations. After discussing in chapter two how best to justify political interference in otherwise free peoples lives, Wolff goes on in chapters 3, 4 and 5 to consider the question of who should govern, the significance of freedom as a political concept, and property distribution.

By the end of the book the reader will have impressed on him a rudimentary but subtle philosophical appreciation for the virtues of liberal democracy. Furthermore, he will have encountered many of the key thinkers in the development of the liberal tradition, including Locke, J.S. Mill and John Rawls. However, Wolff also ensures an awareness that a philosophical defence of politics is problematically never rigorous enough to overcome every sceptical argument. Indeed, Wolff is particularly sensitive to the persuasiveness of arguments for anarchy, and to the reality that politics is very rarely sustained by rational assent. He also in the final chapter discusses feminist objections.

The book is overall a well-measured, subtle and clear introduction to liberal political philosophy, ideal for students of the subject. I give it four stars rather than five because there is a wider world of political philosophy not much engaged with. Although Wolff is reasonably explicit about the purpose of the book as a liberal manual, his bias leaves liberal thought better intact than is often elsewhere concluded.


Very accessible and honestly engaging, 10 Nov 2006


As an upper sixth-form student hoping to pursue a partial degree in philosophy, this book has been an excellent introduction to the central issues of political philosophy.

Lucid, impartial text that avoids dry language and communicates ideas clearly and enjoyably make this book a highly recommended pick.

Good though incomplete, 22 Sep 2002
Enjoyable reading for those who want to become acquainted with some questions of political philosophy. However, no introduction to political philosophy is complete with only one page dedicated to Burke and Oakeshott and not a single reference to Popper or Isaiah Berlin. Nevertheless, pleasing.

Good introduction, 15 Nov 2008
I read through this book quickly and although I was already familiar with most of the material, I found that it it jogged my memory in a few areas. I have already read quite a lot of philosophy but there were one or two things that I learned from this book.

Nigel Warburton is a senior lecturer in philosophy at the Open University and he has divided this book into seven chapters. Particularly on the section on meta-ethics in his second chapter entitled "Right and Wrong" and the section on falsification in his fifth chapter "Science", I gained some insights into things that I hadn't picked up from reading much larger books. One of the best introductions on the market to a very important but sometimes abstract and obscure subject.

Superb!, 07 Dec 2007
Like 'Philosophy - the classics', this is an excellent book, reference and general reader. It gives a useful reading list at the end of each chapter.

The Basics takes a topic based approach, including Philosophy of : Science, Mind, Religion, the external world etc. and starts off by expounding the theory (say behaviourism) and then the arguments against it.

Warburton writes really clearly and this book is a useful resource for student and anyone interested in Philosophy.


Every philosopher at every level should own this book, 03 Feb 2006
I did a philosophy degree and I remember getting a bit dismayed by some of the books I had to read. Then I stumbled across this. In his introduction he writes that philosophy is often seen as harder than it actually is and this is because many philosophers aren't good writers.

This is 100% true and restored my faith in philosophy. Warburton is an extremely clear writer and covers the essential points is a lucid manner. If it's within the scope of this book then any essay you have to write, or topic you are interested in should begin with this book. Of course you will need others but this is a great starting point.

See also his 'philosophy: a-z' You might also find Bryan Magee's books useful and Bertrand Russell is a bit of a genius too.

EXCELLENT BOOK FOR REVISION, 10 Sep 2002
I have just completed an ethics and philosophy A Level for which I used this book. The book itself is clear and concise, making it excellent revision material. It covers all of the standard need to know topics and does so in an intelligent, factual manner! Definitly use this for A Level standards although I would not reccomend using it as a basis for research as it simply isn't detailed enough.

Great for anyone!, 22 Nov 2001
I have just embarked on a two year philosophy A-Level course and i am using Warburton's book as a stepping stone to discoving many aspects of philosophy. The clarity and use of language makes this book easy for anyone to understand, not just academics. It allows easy access to the world of philosophy unlike so many other books on this topic. Well done Nigel!

Compelling? Not really..., 06 Mar 2008
I read Think a year or two after completing a degree in philosophy at Durham, and, sadly, I did not find it compelling. It struck me as the work of a sophisticated expert who enjoys dazzling us with the grip he has on his subject.

Blackburn surely wrote it for the A level student who is thinking of reading philosophy at university, but I fear it may put more readers off philosophy than it will inspire to study it.

The book is conventional, Cartesian, middle-of-the-road, politically correct and safe in its approach. No applecarts are upset and the sceptical questions and challenges are the old, old ones we've heard so often before. European philosophy hardly gets a look in. Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Foucault, Derrida -- none of them are mentioned.

I had the feeling I was tramping over well-trampled ground. The chapters read like university lectures: I did wonder if the whole book had been compiled by cobbling together of the author's well-thumbed lecture notes.

This was probably an easy book to write but in spite of its self-congratulatory title, it is not by any stretch of the imagination compelling.

Worthwhile introduction, 30 Jun 2004
I picked up this book as i wanted a basic introduction to philosophy and the major ideas: I wasnt disappointed. The book is ordered by theme (knowledge, mind, free will, the self, god, ...etc) and goes through a readable account of the development of ideas in each, with long quotations from major philosophers. Within each section, approaches to addressing the theme are explained and dissected plainly. The style is easy to follow and avoids the twisty wordgames of much philosophical writing. Nevertheless the book demands and rewards attention and should be engaging enough for anyone with a modicum of literacy and interest.

Downsides: lack of a further reading list is irritating. Blackburn also ignores pretty much everything thats happened since 1900 (except Wittgenstein and Russell) and avoids much continental philosophy since Kant. The quotes and works of Hume are given a disproportionate regard, given his influence. This may be seen as conservatism from Blackburn, but it does allow him to give the book a brevity which is excellent. However it should be pointed out that Blackburn is intellectually conservative and this sometimes come through in the writing.

This is best read as an introduction to philosophical thinking (as opposed to the history of philosophy) and at the very least, the reader should be able to ask the right question if not come up with the answer.

Please can we have something similar about modern philosophy?

Lives up to it's title - certainly makes you think., 02 Jan 2002
The book is great in that yes, it certainly does make you think long and hard about the subjects at hand. However, rather disturbingly for a book written by a Professor at Cambridge, in one case in particular it made me think that Simon Blackburn had got it wrong. The analysis that Blackburn gives on the nature of interpretation of colour and light is seriously flawed, in that his example of scattering dust on a window to highlight the differences between someone that sees monochromatically as we might (whatever that is!!!) and someone who sees in exact negative does not tally.

His argument that scattering dust would make the image for someone that sees in negative sharper and more detailed is patently wrong, since if the dust is dark, someone seeing it in negative will see it as white and vice versa. How such a mistake occurred in a book that is otherwise well researched is beyond me, but is something that is made note worthy by the fact it is so out of character with the rest of the book.

A good introduction, 12 Dec 2001
This is a good accessible introduction. I would recommend it to anyone approaching the subject for the first time. Unfortunately I was looking for a bit more depth but this is not the fault of the book.

Good Introduction, 27 Sep 2001
This book is well written, and covers most of the important themes in an interesting way. I'd reccomed that you read it in conjuction with another introduction to the subject, in order to gain a more balanced view. My only major problem with this book is it's lack of a 'Further Reading' section.

Good Reference, 14 Aug 2002
If you're looking for something in the same style as Warburton's Philosophy: The Basics (which is highly recommended) you may be a bit disappointed in this book. The style is very much more like a dictionary of thinking. Each entry describes a kind of argument or thought pattern and is cross referenced to others. This makes it a bit difficult to read in a lineary fashion but does aid in it's use as a reference tool. 5 stars for content, 3 stars for format.

Clear thinking made clear!, 14 Sep 2000
This book should be compulsory preparation for anyone who has to read the output of politicians, consultants, journalists, pundits or experts in any field.

I have not come across a more accessible guide the the rhetoric, sloppy thinking, and pure sophistry that is evident in much factual analysis and opinion today.

Buy at once!

Useful Glossary of Philosophical Terminology, 19 Aug 2000
Being able to spot poor reasoning and diversionary tactics such as fallacies, gobbledegook, jargon, pseudo-profundity and smokescreens will put more clout behind your arguments and sharpen your thinking. As an introduction to critical thinking, this delightfully concise little book provides some of the basic tools for clear thinking on any issue. The techniques and topics discussed are transferable and can be applied to any area in which clear thought is required: they have direct applications in most academic disciplines and in any facet of life in which people present reasons and evidence in support of conclusions.

Now in its second edition, this book is a set text for the Open University A211 Philosophy and the Human Situation course. It will give you the power to tell a good from a bad argument. Using witty and topical examples, author Nigel Warburton will enable you to distinguish with confidence between a red herring and a straw man. This new edition updates the whole text and includes many new entries, all listed in alphabetical order. However, the next edition should include the following suggested entries: * ergo et sum * I think, therefore I am * Rene Descartes * logic * Betrand Russell * Lateral thinking * Six Thinking Hats * tautology

Perfect introduction, 19 May 2008
This is probably the best introduction available, being lucid and succinct, it also takes just the right approach to the subject for the beginner. Instead of a chapter by chapter guide to the main thinkers or theories, Wolff cleverly structures the book in such a way that the student is gently coaxed into exploring the fundamental questions of political philosophy for himself. The author notes at the beginning that it is sometimes said that 'who gets what?' and 'who says so?' are the only two questions of importance in the subject. Whilst denying this to be entirely the case, Wolff puts these questions firmly into intial context by asking why we need the state at all and then proceeds to ask if we do need the state, who indeed should govern it? He then explores the issue of the distribution of goods before returning to the 'who says who gets what?' and by the end of the book the reader should be able to explore that question through the lenses of the competing theories of today, such as feminism or communitarianism.

I was lucky enough to have the author as one of my lecturers at university and, indeed, to take my tutorials in political philosophy in my final year. As a working class student with little self-esteem and who was failing abjectly to mix within the rarefied air of an elite university, Mr Wolff admirably strived to boost my confidence and his tutorials (and lectures) were a model of patience and clarity. This book is imbubed with these qualities throughout and thus can't be recommended highly enough. Whether you are an a-level student or a 1st year undergrad, this book will have you asking the right questions and position you to look in more detail at the major theories.

Easy to read short intro to political philosophy, 24 Feb 2008
Jonathon Wolff has written an excellent and easy to digest intro to political philosophy. It's not particularly long and doesn't provide an in depth look at many topics. But it covers off the basics and sets out the key ideas and people. He has also used a semi chronological layout which helps give a sense of the way thought has developed over time. A good resource for a student, but certainly readable enough for someone taking a casual interest in the subject area.

A critical but sympathetic guide to the persuasiveness of liberal political philosophy, 09 Sep 2007
Jonathan Wolff defines the territory of political philosophy by reference to the modern distinction between descriptive and normative political study; i.e. a descriptive process entails the collecting and ordering of factual data about politics, a normative process entails reasoned argument to the effect of purporting a theory on which to model politics. The latter normative process is the task of political philosophy.

Whilst an introduction to political philosophy might aspire to be a purely descriptive account of normative arguments (and criticisms), Wolff's book isn't neutral in this respect, assuming throughout a (in his words) `liberal individualist' outlook. As such his starting point in chapter one is the 17th century proto-liberal depiction of the State of Nature, and the pressing need to find a rational basis for political rights and obligations. After discussing in chapter two how best to justify political interference in otherwise free peoples lives, Wolff goes on in chapters 3, 4 and 5 to consider the question of who should govern, the significance of freedom as a political concept, and property distribution.

By the end of the book the reader will have impressed on him a rudimentary but subtle philosophical appreciation for the virtues of liberal democracy. Furthermore, he will have encountered many of the key thinkers in the development of the liberal tradition, including Locke, J.S. Mill and John Rawls. However, Wolff also ensures an awareness that a philosophical defence of politics is problematically never rigorous enough to overcome every sceptical argument. Indeed, Wolff is particularly sensitive to the persuasiveness of arguments for anarchy, and to the reality that politics is very rarely sustained by rational assent. He also in the final chapter discusses feminist objections.

The book is overall a well-measured, subtle and clear introduction to liberal political philosophy, ideal for students of the subject. I give it four stars rather than five because there is a wider world of political philosophy not much engaged with. Although Wolff is reasonably explicit about the purpose of the book as a liberal manual, his bias leaves liberal thought better intact than is often elsewhere concluded.


Very accessible and honestly engaging, 10 Nov 2006


As an upper sixth-form student hoping to pursue a partial degree in philosophy, this book has been an excellent introduction to the central issues of political philosophy.

Lucid, impartial text that avoids dry language and communicates ideas clearly and enjoyably make this book a highly recommended pick.

Good though incomplete, 22 Sep 2002
Enjoyable reading for those who want to become acquainted with some questions of political philosophy. However, no introduction to political philosophy is complete with only one page dedicated to Burke and Oakeshott and not a single reference to Popper or Isaiah Berlin. Nevertheless, pleasing.

Good introduction, 17 Nov 2008
There is a difference between political philosophy, ideology and day to day politics.

Political philosophy asks question about the nature of democracy, the ideal state and the like. This subject is the most abstract and introduces ideas such as how should citizens be organsed and education (see Plato) or why do we need a sovereign (see Hobbes) or are we entitled to private property (see Locke).

Ideology (which is sometimes a dirty word) tends to refer to braod political ideas such as Conservatism, Liberalism, Socialism and Communism. Ideology tends to form a bridge between political philosophy (and other subjects such as history, economics and sociology) and day to day politics. Whatever they claim, most parties tend to draw on a broad 'ideology' which helps them in their formulation of an election manifesto which also tempers the party's ideology to meet practical needs and to stand a reasonable chance of getting elected.

Political philosophy is essentially an abstract subjects quite removed from day to day politics and concerned with debating the meaning of fundlemental political concepts and the nature of man and society.

This is a good but basic introduction.




Unsatisfying, 28 Feb 2008
This was a mildly interesting introduction to an interesting subject. I felt it rambled a little, and was disappointed that it did not introduce any key theorists and missed out some key concepts (sovereignty, for example). The book only really succeeds in raising some key questions, but does not introduce one to the multifarious attempts to answer these questions. Furthermore, Miller's own opinions (given heavy weighting in the final chapters) are not particularly interesting or radical, and given the nature of the medium (a 'very short introduction') would be better presented elsewhere.

If you want a very short introduction to the subject of political philosophy, a good alternative is the 'Politics: A Very Short Introduction', which I have found to be a much better read and much more thorough.

Gets my vote, 03 Dec 2007
Short, readable, crystal clear. Politics books are often a hard climb or at least a tedious trudge. This is a smooth glide by comparison.
Miller states at the start that he wants to avoid jargon and academic mumbo-jumbo and he does just that, taking us on a concise but enjoyable tour of political philosophy. He begins at first principles and gradually builds his arguments, with deftly chosen examples adding depth and colour to the text. The logical progression means that the focus is firmly on democracy (since that is the political system that makes most sense to most people nowadays). Although he presents (and knocks down) arguments for alternative systems, don't expect great forays into the pros and cons of ideologies like Communism or Fascism. Among the concepts he tackles are justice, social justice, freedom, multiculturalism, feminism and globalisation.
The thoughts of political philosophers such as Plato, Rousseau, Locke, Mill and Rawls are woven beautifully into the flow, compact nuggets that reinforce rather than halt the narrative. Anyone who has tried to trawl through Rawls in the original will whisper a quiet thankyou when they arrive at the digested wisdom of Miller's version.
Miller makes a promise at the outset and he sticks to it: to be scrupulously fair and present all sides of each argument, even if the reader doesn't share his own leanings (which I sensed were slightly leftward).
In sum, it would be hard to do better than this for a well-reasoned introduction to (or refresher course in) political philosophy.

perfectly pocket-sized political philosophy, 17 Jul 2007
This little book is a quick yet thoughtful work-through of some major areas of political philosophy. Whats great is that you can finish it in a single evening and know loads more than before. David Miller is a very good writer and his narrative style sweeps the reader along as he investigates political issues. Miller has refrained from cluttering his text with unnesscary jargon. Throughly enjoyable and refreshingly different to other introductions, this is simply a very good book. I loved the way in which Miller used a 14th century painting ('Allergory of Good and Bad Government' by Lorenzetti) to act as a discussion point for opening up political philosophy becuase it really added flavour to proceedings.

It should be warned, however, that this book is far from comprehensive even in an 'introduction' sense of the word. Instead of being written with a quick synopsis of all the major discussion, Miller instead opts for a continuous narrative that works through *some* of the major topics of the discipline. Interestingly, Miller's book is not so much an illustration of the debates as it is an argument for his personal conclusions through illustrating these debates. This is not neccessarily a bad thing, though, as it still serves to introudce the reader to the fundamentals and still allows the reader to come to their own opinons. In many ways, it is actually quite nice to see conclusions made for once rather than questions left unanswered as coming to conclusions is also a part of the philosophical discipline.

I have given this book five stars becuase its great, but it should be realised that other, more comprehensive introductions could prove better due to more depth. However, it undoubtedly introduces political philosophy in an excellent manner, especially considering its length (130 or so very small pages). It is, afterall, meant to be a very short introduction and it scores five stars when taken as such.

Life saver, 07 Dec 2003
I have always had my doubts about chosing to study political philosophy at university like i did. Although i enjoy the subject, i have never fully understood the principals...until now! David Miller uses great explanations of the ideas behind the subject so that everyone can understand. It is short, but he has used the space well and now i am well on course for a first!

Good introduction, 15 Nov 2008
I read through this book quickly and although I was already familiar with most of the material, I found that it it jogged my memory in a few areas. I have already read quite a lot of philosophy but there were one or two things that I learned from this book.

Nigel Warburton is a senior lecturer in philosophy at the Open University and he has divided this book into seven chapters. Particularly on the section on meta-ethics in his second chapter entitled "Right and Wrong" and the section on falsification in his fifth chapter "Science", I gained some insights into things that I hadn't picked up from reading much larger books. One of the best introductions on the market to a very important but sometimes abstract and obscure subject.

Superb!, 07 Dec 2007
Like 'Philosophy - the classics', this is an excellent book, reference and general reader. It gives a useful reading list at the end of each chapter.

The Basics takes a topic based approach, including Philosophy of : Science, Mind, Religion, the external world etc. and starts off by expounding the theory (say behaviourism) and then the arguments against it.

Warburton writes really clearly and this book is a useful resource for student and anyone interested in Philosophy.


Every philosopher at every level should own this book, 03 Feb 2006
I did a philosophy degree and I remember getting a bit dismayed by some of the books I had to read. Then I stumbled across this. In his introduction he writes that philosophy is often seen as harder than it actually is and this is because many philosophers aren't good writers.

This is 100% true and restored my faith in philosophy. Warburton is an extremely clear writer and covers the essential points is a lucid manner. If it's within the scope of this book then any essay you have to write, or topic you are interested in should begin with this book. Of course you will need others but this is a great starting point.

See also his 'philosophy: a-z' You might also find Bryan Magee's books useful and Bertrand Russell is a bit of a genius too.

EXCELLENT BOOK FOR REVISION, 10 Sep 2002
I have just completed an ethics and philosophy A Level for which I used this book. The book itself is clear and concise, making it excellent revision material. It covers all of the standard need to know topics and does so in an intelligent, factual manner! Definitly use this for A Level standards although I would not reccomend using it as a basis for research as it simply isn't detailed enough.

Great for anyone!, 22 Nov 2001
I have just embarked on a two year philosophy A-Level course and i am using Warburton's book as a stepping stone to discoving many aspects of philosophy. The clarity and use of language makes this book easy for anyone to understand, not just academics. It allows easy access to the world of philosophy unlike so many other books on this topic. Well done Nigel!

Compelling? Not really..., 06 Mar 2008
I read Think a year or two after completing a degree in philosophy at Durham, and, sadly, I did not find it compelling. It struck me as the work of a sophisticated expert who enjoys dazzling us with the grip he has on his subject.

Blackburn surely wrote it for the A level student who is thinking of reading philosophy at university, but I fear it may put more readers off philosophy than it will inspire to study it.

The book is conventional, Cartesian, middle-of-the-road, politically correct and safe in its approach. No applecarts are upset and the sceptical questions and challenges are the old, old ones we've heard so often before. European philosophy hardly gets a look in. Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Foucault, Derrida -- none of them are mentioned.

I had the feeling I was tramping over well-trampled ground. The chapters read like university lectures: I did wonder if the whole book had been compiled by cobbling together of the author's well-thumbed lecture notes.

This was probably an easy book to write but in spite of its self-congratulatory title, it is not by any stretch of the imagination compelling.

Worthwhile introduction, 30 Jun 2004
I picked up this book as i wanted a basic introduction to philosophy and the major ideas: I wasnt disappointed. The book is ordered by theme (knowledge, mind, free will, the self, god, ...etc) and goes through a readable account of the development of ideas in each, with long quotations from major philosophers. Within each section, approaches to addressing the theme are explained and dissected plainly. The style is easy to follow and avoids the twisty wordgames of much philosophical writing. Nevertheless the book demands and rewards attention and should be engaging enough for anyone with a modicum of literacy and interest.

Downsides: lack of a further reading list is irritating. Blackburn also ignores pretty much everything thats happened since 1900 (except Wittgenstein and Russell) and avoids much continental philosophy since Kant. The quotes and works of Hume are given a disproportionate regard, given his influence. This may be seen as conservatism from Blackburn, but it does allow him to give the book a brevity which is excellent. However it should be pointed out that Blackburn is intellectually conservative and this sometimes come through in the writing.

This is best read as an introduction to philosophical thinking (as opposed to the history of philosophy) and at the very least, the reader should be able to ask the right question if not come up with the answer.

Please can we have something similar about modern philosophy?

Lives up to it's title - certainly makes you think., 02 Jan 2002
The book is great in that yes, it certainly does make you think long and hard about the subjects at hand. However, rather disturbingly for a book written by a Professor at Cambridge, in one case in particular it made me think that Simon Blackburn had got it wrong. The analysis that Blackburn gives on the nature of interpretation of colour and light is seriously flawed, in that his example of scattering dust on a window to highlight the differences between someone that sees monochromatically as we might (whatever that is!!!) and someone who sees in exact negative does not tally.

His argument that scattering dust would make the image for someone that sees in negative sharper and more detailed is patently wrong, since if the dust is dark, someone seeing it in negative will see it as white and vice versa. How such a mistake occurred in a book that is otherwise well researched is beyond me, but is something that is made note worthy by the fact it is so out of character with the rest of the book.

A good introduction, 12 Dec 2001
This is a good accessible introduction. I would recommend it to anyone approaching the subject for the first time. Unfortunately I was looking for a bit more depth but this is not the fault of the book.

Good Introduction, 27 Sep 2001
This book is well written, and covers most of the important themes in an interesting way. I'd reccomed that you read it in conjuction with another introduction to the subject, in order to gain a more balanced view. My only major problem with this book is it's lack of a 'Further Reading' section.

Good Reference, 14 Aug 2002
If you're looking for something in the same style as Warburton's Philosophy: The Basics (which is highly recommended) you may be a bit disappointed in this book. The style is very much more like a dictionary of thinking. Each entry describes a kind of argument or thought pattern and is cross referenced to others. This makes it a bit difficult to read in a lineary fashion but does aid in it's use as a reference tool. 5 stars for content, 3 stars for format.

Clear thinking made clear!, 14 Sep 2000
This book should be compulsory preparation for anyone who has to read the output of politicians, consultants, journalists, pundits or experts in any field.

I have not come across a more accessible guide the the rhetoric, sloppy thinking, and pure sophistry that is evident in much factual analysis and opinion today.

Buy at once!

Useful Glossary of Philosophical Terminology, 19 Aug 2000
Being able to spot poor reasoning and diversionary tactics such as fallacies, gobbledegook, jargon, pseudo-profundity and smokescreens will put more clout behind your arguments and sharpen your thinking. As an introduction to critical thinking, this delightfully concise little book provides some of the basic tools for clear thinking on any issue. The techniques and topics discussed are transferable and can be applied to any area in which clear thought is required: they have direct applications in most academic disciplines and in any facet of life in which people present reasons and evidence in support of conclusions.

Now in its second edition, this book is a set text for the Open University A211 Philosophy and the Human Situation course. It will give you the power to tell a good from a bad argument. Using witty and topical examples, author Nigel Warburton will enable you to distinguish with confidence between a red herring and a straw man. This new edition updates the whole text and includes many new entries, all listed in alphabetical order. However, the next edition should include the following suggested entries: * ergo et sum * I think, therefore I am * Rene Descartes * logic * Betrand Russell * Lateral thinking * Six Thinking Hats * tautology

Perfect introduction, 19 May 2008
This is probably the best introduction available, being lucid and succinct, it also takes just the right approach to the subject for the beginner. Instead of a chapter by chapter guide to the main thinkers or theories, Wolff cleverly structures the book in such a way that the student is gently coaxed into exploring the fundamental questions of political philosophy for himself. The author notes at the beginning that it is sometimes said that 'who gets what?' and 'who says so?' are the only two questions of importance in the subject. Whilst denying this to be entirely the case, Wolff puts these questions firmly into intial context by asking why we need the state at all and then proceeds to ask if we do need the state, who indeed should govern it? He then explores the issue of the distribution of goods before returning to the 'who says who gets what?' and by the end of the book the reader should be able to explore that question through the lenses of the competing theories of today, such as feminism or communitarianism.

I was lucky enough to have the author as one of my lecturers at university and, indeed, to take my tutorials in political philosophy in my final year. As a working class student with little self-esteem and who was failing abjectly to mix within the rarefied air of an elite university, Mr Wolff admirably strived to boost my confidence and his tutorials (and lectures) were a model of patience and clarity. This book is imbubed with these qualities throughout and thus can't be recommended highly enough. Whether you are an a-level student or a 1st year undergrad, this book will have you asking the right questions and position you to look in more detail at the major theories.

Easy to read short intro to political philosophy, 24 Feb 2008
Jonathon Wolff has written an excellent and easy to digest intro to political philosophy. It's not particularly long and doesn't provide an in depth look at many topics. But it covers off the basics and sets out the key ideas and people. He has also used a semi chronological layout which helps give a sense of the way thought has developed over time. A good resource for a student, but certainly readable enough for someone taking a casual interest in the subject area.

A critical but sympathetic guide to the persuasiveness of liberal political philosophy, 09 Sep 2007
Jonathan Wolff defines the territory of political philosophy by reference to the modern distinction between descriptive and normative political study; i.e. a descriptive process entails the collecting and ordering of factual data about politics, a normative process entails reasoned argument to the effect of purporting a theory on which to model politics. The latter normative process is the task of political philosophy.

Whilst an introduction to political philosophy might aspire to be a purely descriptive account of normative arguments (and criticisms), Wolff's book isn't neutral in this respect, assuming throughout a (in his words) `liberal individualist' outlook. As such his starting point in chapter one is the 17th century proto-liberal depiction of the State of Nature, and the pressing need to find a rational basis for political rights and obligations. After discussing in chapter two how best to justify political interference in otherwise free peoples lives, Wolff goes on in chapters 3, 4 and 5 to consider the question of who should govern, the significance of freedom as a political concept, and property distribution.

By the end of the book the reader will have impressed on him a rudimentary but subtle philosophical appreciation for the virtues of liberal democracy. Furthermore, he will have encountered many of the key thinkers in the development of the liberal tradition, including Locke, J.S. Mill and John Rawls. However, Wolff also ensures an awareness that a philosophical defence of politics is problematically never rigorous enough to overcome every sceptical argument. Indeed, Wolff is particularly sensitive to the persuasiveness of arguments for anarchy, and to the reality that politics is very rarely sustained by rational assent. He also in the final chapter discusses feminist objections.

The book is overall a well-measured, subtle and clear introduction to liberal political philosophy, ideal for students of the subject. I give it four stars rather than five because there is a wider world of political philosophy not much engaged with. Although Wolff is reasonably explicit about the purpose of the book as a liberal manual, his bias leaves liberal thought better intact than is often elsewhere concluded.


Very accessible and honestly engaging, 10 Nov 2006


As an upper sixth-form student hoping to pursue a partial degree in philosophy, this book has been an excellent introduction to the central issues of political philosophy.

Lucid, impartial text that avoids dry language and communicates ideas clearly and enjoyably make this book a highly recommended pick.

Good though incomplete, 22 Sep 2002
Enjoyable reading for those who want to become acquainted with some questions of political philosophy. However, no introduction to political philosophy is complete with only one page dedicated to Burke and Oakeshott and not a single reference to Popper or Isaiah Berlin. Nevertheless, pleasing.

Good introduction, 17 Nov 2008
There is a difference between political philosophy, ideology and day to day politics.

Political philosophy asks question about the nature of democracy, the ideal state and the like. This subject is the most abstract and introduces ideas such as how should citizens be organsed and education (see Plato) or why do we need a sovereign (see Hobbes) or are we entitled to private property (see Locke).

Ideology (which is sometimes a dirty word) tends to refer to braod political ideas such as Conservatism, Liberalism, Socialism and Communism. Ideology tends to form a bridge between political philosophy (and other subjects such as history, economics and sociology) and day to day politics. Whatever they claim, most parties tend to draw on a broad 'ideology' which helps them in their formulation of an election manifesto which also tempers the party's ideology to meet practical needs and to stand a reasonable chance of getting elected.

Political philosophy is essentially an abstract subjects quite removed from day to day politics and concerned with debating the meaning of fundlemental political concepts and the nature of man and society.

This is a good but basic introduction.




Unsatisfying, 28 Feb 2008
This was a mildly interesting introduction to an interesting subject. I felt it rambled a little, and was disappointed that it did not introduce any key theorists and missed out some key concepts (sovereignty, for example). The book only really succeeds in raising some key questions, but does not introduce one to the multifarious attempts to answer these questions. Furthermore, Miller's own opinions (given heavy weighting in the final chapters) are not particularly interesting or radical, and given the nature of the medium (a 'very short introduction') would be better presented elsewhere.

If you want a very short introduction to the subject of political philosophy, a good alternative is the 'Politics: A Very Short Introduction', which I have found to be a much better read and much more thorough.

Gets my vote, 03 Dec 2007
Short, readable, crystal clear. Politics books are often a hard climb or at least a tedious trudge. This is a smooth glide by comparison.
Miller states at the start that he wants to avoid jargon and academic mumbo-jumbo and he does just that, taking us on a concise but enjoyable tour of political philosophy. He begins at first principles and gradually builds his arguments, with deftly chosen examples adding depth and colour to the text. The logical progression means that the focus is firmly on democracy (since that is the political system that makes most sense to most people nowadays). Although he presents (and knocks down) arguments for alternative systems, don't expect great forays into the pros and cons of ideologies like Communism or Fascism. Among the concepts he tackles are justice, social justice, freedom, multiculturalism, feminism and globalisation.
The thoughts of political philosophers such as Plato, Rousseau, Locke, Mill and Rawls are woven beautifully into the flow, compact nuggets that reinforce rather than halt the narrative. Anyone who has tried to trawl through Rawls in the original will whisper a quiet thankyou when they arrive at the digested wisdom of Miller's version.
Miller makes a promise at the outset and he sticks to it: to be scrupulously fair and present all sides of each argument, even if the reader doesn't share his own leanings (which I sensed were slightly leftward).
In sum, it would be hard to do better than this for a well-reasoned introduction to (or refresher course in) political philosophy.

perfectly pocket-sized political philosophy, 17 Jul 2007
This little book is a quick yet thoughtful work-through of some major areas of political philosophy. Whats great is that you can finish it in a single evening and know loads more than before. David Miller is a very good writer and his narrative style sweeps the reader along as he investigates political issues. Miller has refrained from cluttering his text with unnesscary jargon. Throughly enjoyable and refreshingly different to other introductions, this is simply a very good book. I loved the way in which Miller used a 14th century painting ('Allergory of Good and Bad Government' by Lorenzetti) to act as a discussion point for opening up political philosophy becuase it really added flavour to proceedings.

It should be warned, however, that this book is far from comprehensive even in an 'introduction' sense of the word. Instead of being written with a quick synopsis of all the major discussion, Miller instead opts for a continuous narrative that works through *some* of the major topics of the discipline. Interestingly, Miller's book is not so much an illustration of the debates as it is an argument for his personal conclusions through illustrating these debates. This is not neccessarily a bad thing, though, as it still serves to introudce the reader to the fundamentals and still allows the reader to come to their own opinons. In many ways, it is actually quite nice to see conclusions made for once rather than questions left unanswered as coming to conclusions is also a part of the philosophical discipline.

I have given this book five stars becuase its great, but it should be realised that other, more comprehensive introductions could prove better due to more depth. However, it undoubtedly introduces political philosophy in an excellent manner, especially considering its length (130 or so very small pages). It is, afterall, meant to be a very short introduction and it scores five stars when taken as such.

Life saver, 07 Dec 2003
I have always had my doubts about chosing to study political philosophy at university like i did. Although i enjoy the subject, i have never fully understood the principals...until now! David Miller uses great explanations of the ideas behind the subject so that everyone can understand. It is short, but he has used the space well and now i am well on course for a first!

Brilliant introduction, 17 Nov 2008
This was a brilliant introduction to the philosophy of science and must be one of the best books on the market.

I particularly enjoyed the discussion about Newton and Leibnitz's opposing theories on absolute and relative frames of reference (in space).

A little book of big ideas, 30 Sep 2008
A great little book that introduces the major debates with enough detail to whet the appetite but not enough to intimidate. As befits a book of this nature, the author sensibly avoids polemic and other rhetorical baggage in favour of clear writing, leaving the reader free to concentrate on the ideas. The result is straightforward, unpretentious and concise.

Great little book, 31 Aug 2006
I found this book very clear, comprehensible and enjoyable.

It starts off with a brief history of modern physics and some biology. It then discusses deduction and induction and goes on look at explanation in science and outlines problems associated with these ideas. It then outlines the realist v anti-realist debate.

The philosophy of Popper and Kuhn are critically outlined and there is a chapter on the critics of science. There is also a chapter on specific problems in physics, biology and psychology.

Because there is obviously limited space in a book of this size, it is unable to cover some of the important philosophies of science that have been developed since Kuhn.

However, I thought this book was well written and ideal for the layman wanting an intoduction to this field, and certainly whets the appetite to find out more. Thoroughly recommended.

A fantastic introduction, 11 Apr 2006
The "A Very Short Introduction" series doesn't always come up with good books, but this one is a gem. It really is. It introduces the basics first: deduction, induction, etc. and goes on to talk about the problem of induction, Hume's criticism of it, whether thinking about probability and causation can help. The discussion moves then onto realists vs. anti-realists. The highly influential philosopher Thomas Kuhn is also well covered. Finally, the book covers some problems in biology and physics and generally that result from science. The book is brief and you can read it in a long evening or maybe two short ones, if you're not already familiar with the subject. Most importantly, the author manages to realise that newcomers to the subject deserve a gentle ride, and he does this by writing very accessibly and using plenty of easy-to-understand examples. I would recommend this to anybody trying to find a way into the philosophy of science. Of course, being a "very short introduction" this book doesn't tend to go into very much detail or cover everything that philosophy of science entails. But a very short introduction can't have everything. For beginners I think it is ideal, and that is what it aims to be. Highly recommended.

Reasonable Overview For The Interested, 19 Jan 2006
What do philosophers think about science? This book provides a brief history of the philosophy of science, describes some logical assumptions in the practice of science and problems in science, and discusses Thomas Kuhn's scientific revolutions. The book concludes with a discussion on science and society.

Philosophy of science, as described in this book, seems to have become a rather esoteric subject removed the daily practice of scientists and the everyday use of science. Some questions that spring to mind but which are not covered in this book: Does the publication and independent verification of results lead to the self-correcting nature of science? Why is the simplest explanation the best? How can scientists who cannot easily perform experiments, such as astronomers and sociologists, make verifiable theories?

Chapter 6 presents three problems in science: Newton's view of absolute space, the classification (by feature or by genetics) of living creatures and the whether the mind is modular or not. It's not clear to me how the philosophy of science can help in resolving these problems. Newton's view was probably driven by his desire to prove the literal truth of the Bible. In this day and age of automated indexing systems, does it really matter which method is used to classify creatures? Finally, shouldn't scientists collect more data before deciding if the mind is modular or not?

This book covers a number of topics in the field but fortunately doesn't get bogged down in a deep technical discussion on any single topic. It is a reasonable overview of the topic for the interested reader and one of the better books in the "Very Short Introduction" series.

Good introduction, 15 Nov 2008
I read through this book quickly and although I was already familiar with most of the material, I found that it it jogged my memory in a few areas. I have already read quite a lot of philosophy but there were one or two things that I learned from this book.

Nigel Warburton is a senior lecturer in philosophy at the Open University and he has divided this book into seven chapters. Particularly on the section on meta-ethics in his second chapter entitled "Right and Wrong" and the section on falsification in his fifth chapter "Science", I gained some insights into things that I hadn't picked up from reading much larger books. One of the best introductions on the market to a very important but sometimes abstract and obscure subject.

Superb!, 07 Dec 2007
Like 'Philosophy - the classics', this is an excellent book, reference and general reader. It gives a useful reading list at the end of each chapter.

The Basics takes a topic based approach, including Philosophy of : Science, Mind, Religion, the external world etc. and starts off by expounding the theory (say behaviourism) and then the arguments against it.

Warburton writes really clearly and this book is a useful resource for student and anyone interested in Philosophy.


Every philosopher at every level should own this book, 03 Feb 2006
I did a philosophy degree and I remember getting a bit dismayed by some of the books I had to read. Then I stumbled across this. In his introduction he writes that philosophy is often seen as harder than it actually is and this is because many philosophers aren't good writers.

This is 100% true and restored my faith in philosophy. Warburton is an extremely clear writer and covers the essential points is a lucid manner. If it's within the scope of this book then any essay you have to write, or topic you are interested in should begin with this book. Of course you will need others but this is a great starting point.

See also his 'philosophy: a-z' You might also find Bryan Magee's books useful and Bertrand Russell is a bit of a genius too.

EXCELLENT BOOK FOR REVISION, 10 Sep 2002
I have just completed an ethics and philosophy A Level for which I used this book. The book itself is clear and concise, making it excellent revision material. It covers all of the standard need to know topics and does so in an intelligent, factual manner! Definitly use this for A Level standards although I would not reccomend using it as a basis for research as it simply isn't detailed enough.

Great for anyone!, 22 Nov 2001
I have just embarked on a two year philosophy A-Level course and i am using Warburton's book as a stepping stone to discoving many aspects of philosophy. The clarity and use of language makes this book easy for anyone to understand, not just academics. It allows easy access to the world of philosophy unlike so many other books on this topic. Well done Nigel!

Compelling? Not really..., 06 Mar 2008
I read Think a year or two after completing a degree in philosophy at Durham, and, sadly, I did not find it compelling. It struck me as the work of a sophisticated expert who enjoys dazzling us with the grip he has on his subject.

Blackburn surely wrote it for the A level student who is thinking of reading philosophy at university, but I fear it may put more readers off philosophy than it will inspire to study it.

The book is conventional, Cartesian, middle-of-the-road, politically correct and safe in its approach. No applecarts are upset and the sceptical questions and challenges are the old, old ones we've heard so often before. European philosophy hardly gets a look in. Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Foucault, Derrida -- none of them are mentioned.

I had the feeling I was tramping over well-trampled ground. The chapters read like university lectures: I did wonder if the whole book had been compiled by cobbling together of the author's well-thumbed lecture notes.

This was probably an easy book to write but in spite of its self-congratulatory title, it is not by any stretch of the imagination compelling.

Worthwhile introduction, 30 Jun 2004
I picked up this book as i wanted a basic introduction to philosophy and the major ideas: I wasnt disappointed. The book is ordered by theme (knowledge, mind, free will, the self, god, ...etc) and goes through a readable account of the development of ideas in each, with long quotations from major philosophers. Within each section, approaches to addressing the theme are explained and dissected plainly. The style is easy to follow and avoids the twisty wordgames of much philosophical writing. Nevertheless the book demands and rewards attention and should be engaging enough for anyone with a modicum of literacy and interest.

Downsides: lack of a further reading list is irritating. Blackburn also ignores pretty much everything thats happened since 1900 (except Wittgenstein and Russell) and avoids much continental philosophy since Kant. The quotes and works of Hume are given a disproportionate regard, given his influence. This may be seen as conservatism from Blackburn, but it does allow him to give the book a brevity which is excellent. However it should be pointed out that Blackburn is intellectually conservative and this sometimes come through in the writing.

This is best read as an introduction to philosophical thinking (as opposed to the history of philosophy) and at the very least, the reader should be able to ask the right question if not come up with the answer.

Please can we have something similar about modern philosophy?

Lives up to it's title - certainly makes you think., 02 Jan 2002
The book is great in that yes, it certainly does make you think long and hard about the subjects at hand. However, rather disturbingly for a book written by a Professor at Cambridge, in one case in particular it made me think that Simon Blackburn had got it wrong. The analysis that Blackburn gives on the nature of interpretation of colour and light is seriously flawed, in that his example of scattering dust on a window to highlight the differences between someone that sees monochromatically as we might (whatever that is!!!) and someone who sees in exact negative does not tally.

His argument that scattering dust would make the image for someone that sees in negative sharper and more detailed is patently wrong, since if the dust is dark, someone seeing it in negative will see it as white and vice versa. How such a mistake occurred in a book that is otherwise well researched is beyond me, but is something that is made note worthy by the fact it is so out of character with the rest of the book.

A good introduction, 12 Dec 2001
This is a good accessible introduction. I would recommend it to anyone approaching the subject for the first time. Unfortunately I was looking for a bit more depth but this is not the fault of the book.

Good Introduction, 27 Sep 2001
This book is well written, and covers most of the important themes in an interesting way. I'd reccomed that you read it in conjuction with another introduction to the subject, in order to gain a more balanced view. My only major problem with this book is it's lack of a 'Further Reading' section.

Good Reference, 14 Aug 2002
If you're looking for something in the same style as Warburton's Philosophy: The Basics (which is highly recommended) you may be a bit disappointed in this book. The style is very much more like a dictionary of thinking. Each entry describes a kind of argument or thought pattern and is cross referenced to others. This makes it a bit difficult to read in a lineary fashion but does aid in it's use as a reference tool. 5 stars for content, 3 stars for format.

Clear thinking made clear!, 14 Sep 2000
This book should be compulsory preparation for anyone who has to read the output of politicians, consultants, journalists, pundits or experts in any field.

I have not come across a more accessible guide the the rhetoric, sloppy thinking, and pure sophistry that is evident in much factual analysis and opinion today.

Buy at once!

Useful Glossary of Philosophical Terminology, 19 Aug 2000
Being able to spot poor reasoning and diversionary tactics such as fallacies, gobbledegook, jargon, pseudo-profundity and smokescreens will put more clout behind your arguments and sharpen your thinking. As an introduction to critical thinking, this delightfully concise little book provides some of the basic tools for clear thinking on any issue. The techniques and topics discussed are transferable and can be applied to any area in which clear thought is required: they have direct applications in most academic disciplines and in any facet of life in which people present reasons and evidence in support of conclusions.

Now in its second edition, this book is a set text for the Open University A211 Philosophy and the Human Situation course. It will give you the power to tell a good from a bad argument. Using witty and topical examples, author Nigel Warburton will enable you to distinguish with confidence between a red herring and a straw man. This new edition updates the whole text and includes many new entries, all listed in alphabetical order. However, the next edition should include the following suggested entries: * ergo et sum * I think, therefore I am * Rene Descartes * logic * Betrand Russell * Lateral thinking * Six Thinking Hats * tautology

Perfect introduction, 19 May 2008
This is probably the best introduction available, being lucid and succinct, it also takes just the right approach to the subject for the beginner. Instead of a chapter by chapter guide to the main thinkers or theories, Wolff cleverly structures the book in such a way that the student is gently coaxed into exploring the fundamental questions of political philosophy for himself. The author notes at the beginning that it is sometimes said that 'who gets what?' and 'who says so?' are the only two questions of importance in the subject. Whilst denying this to be entirely the case, Wolff puts these questions firmly into intial context by asking why we need the state at all and then proceeds to ask if we do need the state, who indeed should govern it? He then explores the issue of the distribution of goods before returning to the 'who says who gets what?' and by the end of the book the reader should be able to explore that question through the lenses of the competing theories of today, such as feminism or communitarianism.

I was lucky enough to have the author as one of my lecturers at university and, indeed, to take my tutorials in political philosophy in my final year. As a working class student with little self-esteem and who was failing abjectly to mix within the rarefied air of an elite university, Mr Wolff admirably strived to boost my confidence and his tutorials (and lectures) were a model of patience and clarity. This book is imbubed with these qualities throughout and thus can't be recommended highly enough. Whether you are an a-level student or a 1st year undergrad, this book will have you asking the right questions and position you to look in more detail at the major theories.

Easy to read short intro to political philosophy, 24 Feb 2008
Jonathon Wolff has written an excellent and easy to digest intro to political philosophy. It's not particularly long and doesn't provide an in depth look at many topics. But it covers off the basics and sets out the key ideas and people. He has also used a semi chronological layout which helps give a sense of the way thought has developed over time. A good resource for a student, but certainly readable enough for someone taking a casual interest in the subject area.

A critical but sympathetic guide to the persuasiveness of liberal political philosophy, 09 Sep 2007
Jonathan Wolff defines the territory of political philosophy by reference to the modern distinction between descriptive and normative political study; i.e. a descriptive process entails the collecting and ordering of factual data about politics, a normative process entails reasoned argument to the effect of purporting a theory on which to model politics. The latter normative process is the task of political philosophy.

Whilst an introduction to political philosophy might aspire to be a purely descriptive account of normative arguments (and criticisms), Wolff's book isn't neutral in this respect, assuming throughout a (in his words) `liberal individualist' outlook. As such his starting point in chapter one is the 17th century proto-liberal depiction of the State of Nature, and the pressing need to find a rational basis for political rights and obligations. After discussing in chapter two how best to justify political interference in otherwise free peoples lives, Wolff goes on in chapters 3, 4 and 5 to consider the question of who should govern, the significance of freedom as a political concept, and property distribution.

By the end of the book the reader will have impressed on him a rudimentary but subtle philosophical appreciation for the virtues of liberal democracy. Furthermore, he will have encountered many of the key thinkers in the development of the liberal tradition, including Locke, J.S. Mill and John Rawls. However, Wolff also ensures an awareness that a philosophical defence of politics is problematically never rigorous enough to overcome every sceptical argument. Indeed, Wolff is particularly sensitive to the persuasiveness of arguments for anarchy, and to the reality that politics is very rarely sustained by rational assent. He also in the final chapter discusses feminist objections.

The book is overall a well-measured, subtle and clear introduction to liberal political philosophy, ideal for students of the subject. I give it four stars rather than five because there is a wider world of political philosophy not much engaged with. Although Wolff is reasonably explicit about the purpose of the book as a liberal manual, his bias leaves liberal thought better intact than is often elsewhere concluded.


Very accessible and honestly engaging, 10 Nov 2006


As an upper sixth-form student hoping to pursue a partial degree in philosophy, this book has been an excellent introduction to the central issues of political philosophy.

Lucid, impartial text that avoids dry language and communicates ideas clearly and enjoyably make this book a highly