We would like to thank an anonymous referee for his helpful comments on a previous version of this paper.

Despite the difficulties of establishing the meaning of "idealistic pragmatism," it is certainly a more descriptively accurate characterization of Josiah Royce’s philosophy than the more usual appellation of "absolute idealist." It suggests the American roots of his thought, and his relationships with Peirce and James, which are handled most sensitively in this book, though more briefly than the title might lead one to expect. The main object of the book is to establish the validity of the title, and in this (...) it largely succeeds. Certainly it is a useful endeavor, for Royce’s reputation as an Absolute Idealist has prevented his thought from becoming as widely known as it deserves to be, both for the clarity of his arguments for an idealist metaphysics and for his insights into the meaning of social life. Mahowald follows Oppenheim’s division of Royce’s thought into three periods, which he very carefully established. She then draws out the "pragmatic" aspects of the thought of each period, supplementing the main works with other published and unpublished material. The characteristic attitude of pragmatists is identified as "future orientation" and then Royce is included among them. (shrink)

By now, the general content and format of an English language book on Descartes can usually be predicted: it will be a painstaking reading of the Meditations, especially of the First and Second Meditations. Bernard Williams honors this formula, but only up to a point. He subtitles his book "The Project of Pure Enquiry," announcing his focal concern with the Meditations. To his credit, however, Williams gives more than passing notice to the way Descartes’ scientific project shaped his epistemological theories. (...) For example, Williams has something both convincing and illuminating to say about the distinction between primary and secondary qualities~ and about the place of experiment and observation in the Cartesian theory of knowledge. Indeed, his insights into Descartes’ scientific project are good enough to warrant more space and attention than he gives them. In any case, Williams’s brief side trips into Descartes’ scientific methodology significantly inform his understanding of the "project of pure enquiry.". (shrink)

A long needed book which will be widely welcomed and used. It is unique in its scope and in the sympathetic intelligence of its exposition. Twenty-eight philosophers from the anonymous redactor of the Book of Genesis to writers still living are represented. Each author is grouped with anywhere from one to four others under a common heading. Sherover has written about 165 pages altogether of introductory remarks to these eight groupings. The remarks are lucid, exhibiting his rare balance and flexibility (...) as both advocate for and critic of the authors, who are otherwise allowed to speak for themselves. His headings may disturb someone who has not confronted the author’s problem. Why, for example, should Whitehead be put under "The Analysis of Temporal Concepts" rather than "Time and Reality"? The answer is that the order of the chapters is historical, and the titles of the sections they fall under indicate a dominant type of philosophical approach when the given author was writing. I find this well done, having faced the problem in an incomplete manuscript which—thanks to the present work—I can now happily put aside. (shrink)