"a precious book ... a work that is in the highest degree pedagogical which stands above the conflicts of parties and opinions." – albert einstein
gibi yorumların yanı sıra;
"bertrand russell's history of western philosophy is amusing, but suffers from defects ... first, it deals largely with ancient philosophy, and is curt and selective in its treatment of the post-cartesian tradition. secondly, it is dismissive towards all those philosophers with whom russell felt no personal affinity. thirdly, it shows no understanding of kant
and post-kantian idealism. it is, for all that, a classic of wit, elegance and resolute idiosyncrasy." – roger scruton
"mr. russell's qualities as a writer and thinker ... are of a high order: deftness of wit, vigor of mind and suppleness of style. yet their presence ... do not save the book
... from being perhaps the worst that mr. russell has written.... as one would expect, the author is at his best when dealing with present day ideas, if for no other reason than his large share in their inception.... by contrast, his treatment of ancient and medieval doctrines is nearly worthless." – leo roberts
"a history of western philosophy errs consistently in this respect. its author never seems to be able to make up his mind whether he is writing history or polemic.... [its method] confers on philosophers who are dead and gone a kind of `false contemporaneity which may make them seem important to the uninitiate. but nevertheless it is a misreading of history.
" – george boas
"history of western philosophy, a vulgar
, but representative book." – george steiner
"he did it to make money, he wrote it fast
. bertrand russell was a great philosopher but a terrible historian.
" – edward pols, professor of philosophy and william j. kenan professor of the humanities, bowdoin college
gibi eleştirilere maruz kalmış ilginç bir kitap para için yaptı demek örneğin ne bileyim çok ağır bir itham. gerçi buradan yaptığım bir alıntının başımı yakmışlığı olsa da aklım bilemedi yine.