A History of Western Philosophy

Throughout the book, Russell expresses a bias in favor of philosophy that is scientific, empirical, and thoroughly rational in basis. Philosophers who exhibit these qualities tend to be praised by Russell, while those who do not are subject to more stringent criticism. For example, early in the book Russell praises the Pre-Socratic philosopher Anaxagoras for keeping alive “the rationalist and scientific traditions”; by contrast, he accuses Pythagoras and Socrates of bringing in “ethical and religious preoccupations” that constituted an “obscurantist bias” (63) in their philosophy.

Russell implies that this ethical and religious dimension was a bad thing for philosophy because it put science in second place and often led to incorrect conclusions about the physical universe. However, underlying Russell’s view is the positivist assumption that only scientific matters are knowable; therefore, in bringing nonscientific matters to human consciousness, he argues that some philosophers have been guilty of obscurity.

Russell faults even the most celebrated Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, for having metaphysical and ethical preoccupations. He criticizes Plato for rejecting “the world of sense in favour of the self-created world of pure thought” and Aristotle for “the belief in purpose as the fundamental concept in science” (73, emphasis added). Such approaches are illegitimate in light of Russell’s bias in favor of positivism, which rejects