every student feels until the coarse necessities of physical existence drag him from the

heights of thought into the mart of economic strife and gain. Most of us have known some

golden days in the June of life when philosophy was in fact what Plato calls it, "that dear

delight"; when the love of a modestly elusive Truth seemed more glorious, incomparably,

than the lust for the ways of the flesh and the dross of the world. And there is always some

wistful remnant in us of that early wooing of wisdom. So much of our lives is meaningless, a

self-cancelling vacillation and futility; we strive with the chaos about us and within; but we

would believe all the while that there is something vital and significant in us; could we but

decipher our own souls. We want to understand; we are like Mitya in The Brothers

Karamazov - "one of those who don't want millions, but an answer to their questions"; we

want to seize the value and perspective of passing things, and so to pull ourselves up out of

the maelstrom of daily circumstance. We want to know that the little things are little, and the

big things big, before it is too late; we want to see things now as they will seem forever -

"in the light of eternity." We want to learn to laugh in the face of the inevitable, to smile

even at the looming of death. We want to be whole, to coordinate our energies by criticizing

and harmonizing our desires; for coordinated energy is the last word in ethics and politics,

and perhaps in logic and metaphysics too. Truth will not make us rich, but it will make us

free.

This book is not a complete history of Philosophy. It is an attempt to humanize knowledge

by centering the story of speculative thought around certain dominant personalities. Certain

lesser figures have been omitted in order that those selected might have the space required to

make them live. Hence the inadequate treatment of the half-legendary pre-Socratics, the

Stoics and Epicureans, the Scholastics, and the epistemologists. The author believes that

epistemology has kidnapped modern philosophy, and well-nigh ruined it; he hopes for the

time when the study of the knowledge-process will be recognized as the business of the

science of psychology, and when philosophy will again be understood as the synthetic

interpretation of all experience rather than the analytic description of the mode and process

of experience itself. Analysis belongs to science, and gives us knowledge; philosophy must

provide a synthesis for wisdom.