Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Robert Solomon

Expand Messages
  • wot53_2000
    I m just sorry he died so young. I admit I m a novice but his overview of Existentialism and Nietzsche on The Teaching Co. courses I thought were well done and
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 1, 2008
      I'm just sorry he died so young. I admit I'm a novice
      but his overview of Existentialism and Nietzsche on The Teaching
      Co. courses I thought were well done and understandable.

      Is there a specific reason you didn't like him C.S.?



      **********
      I would generally agree that Solomon was off the mark in most of his
      writings. I use his texts only as introductions, then spend time
      explaining why he was wrong. For many years, his were the only
      "overview" texts I could locate for surveys of existential thought.

      Never, never, never (and I would repeat again, never) use Solomon as a
      primary source for anything philosophical. Quote him to to open doors,
      to enable corrections. Though I do like "What Nietzsche Really Said,"
      the Kaufmann works are far better on Nietzsche.

      - C. S. Wyatt
    • Exist List Moderator
      ... Probably similar to Wil s reaction... not always solid scholarship, Solomon read into other philosophers his own ideas. He would have been much better
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 1, 2008
        On Aug 01, 2008, at 20:17, wot53_2000 wrote:

        > I'm just sorry he died so young. I admit I'm a novice
        > but his overview of Existentialism and Nietzsche on The Teaching
        > Co. courses I thought were well done and understandable.
        >
        > Is there a specific reason you didn't like him C.S.?


        Probably similar to Wil's reaction... not always solid scholarship,
        Solomon read into other philosophers his own ideas. He would have been
        much better promoting his own views, in his own words, instead of
        misreading / partially reading others.

        This is not unique to Solomon. Sartre's scholarship was horrendous at
        times, as was Nietzsche's. These men had strong ideas and opinions,
        which they often "saw" in the words of others. In Nietzsche's case,
        his professors and other academics listed the various errors. For
        Sartre, Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty were constantly offering
        corrections.

        Solomon's simplifications of Sartre and Nietzsche are similar to the
        Existential Primer -- you cannot do justice to the ideas of others in
        abbreviated forms. However, Solomon took simplifications and expounded
        upon them for hundreds of pages.

        Again, I think Wil might have a more detailed response. I was always
        left wanting more detail and support for the claims made. Many of the
        claims were just too easy to discount, especially any statements about
        Sartre or Camus.

        - C. S. Wyatt
        I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
        that I shall be.
        http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
        http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer
      • ccorey@frontiernet.net
        You would think the Late Bob Solomon to be an existentialist but in fact he was a Hegelian........... -c- ... Christopher Corey Freedom is Existence
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 2, 2008
          You would think the Late Bob Solomon to be an existentialist but in
          fact he was a Hegelian...........

          -c-

          Quoting wot53_2000 <wot53_2000@...>:

          > I'm just sorry he died so young. I admit I'm a novice
          > but his overview of Existentialism and Nietzsche on The Teaching
          > Co. courses I thought were well done and understandable.
          >
          > Is there a specific reason you didn't like him C.S.?
          >
          >
          >
          > **********
          > I would generally agree that Solomon was off the mark in most of his
          > writings. I use his texts only as introductions, then spend time
          > explaining why he was wrong. For many years, his were the only
          > "overview" texts I could locate for surveys of existential thought.
          >
          > Never, never, never (and I would repeat again, never) use Solomon as a
          > primary source for anything philosophical. Quote him to to open doors,
          > to enable corrections. Though I do like "What Nietzsche Really Said,"
          > the Kaufmann works are far better on Nietzsche.
          >
          > - C. S. Wyatt
          >
          >



          Christopher Corey
          Freedom is Existence
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.