"This book is an attempt at a consistent philosophy of life. It tries... to make [the problems of philosophy] intelligible by transparent speech, and to vitalize them by contemporary application."
Of course, it has been many decades since this book has been contemporary - The Mansions of Philosophy, of which this book is a revised edition, came out in 1929. Nevertheless, his clear, enthusiastic prose, peppered with unexpected humor, earned enough of my goodwill to offset his occasional sentimentality or dated, short-sighted viewpoint.
He conceives of philosophy as the noble attempt to transmute ever-increasing knowledge into wisdom. He believed that (to paraphrase) philosophy without science is blind, while science without philosophy is barbarism. I think this is very true, and becoming a generalist (as opposed to a specialist) is something worthwhile to aspire for. Attaining real understanding through a total perspective is a goal in its own, and would also make further action and change much easier and more sensible.
The section on the Philosophy of History contained Durant's musings on creating a composite history: a cross-section of the timeline, as it were, instead of the usual longitudinal narratives. I enjoyed this exposition of his philosophy of history especially because I'd already begun (listening to) his Story of Civilization. This holistic view, of course, is a logical extension of his synthetic conception of philosophy.
I think I am attracted to this sort of synthetic, pluralistic endeavor because I personally enjoy learning about diverse subjects. Durant (conveniently for me) articulates a convincing rationale for this tendency of mine. Of course, of course, I doubt he is talking about amateur dilettantism. But at least he's giving me something to shoot for.
Perhaps, like they say about a liberal education, I should strive to know everything about something, but also something about everything.
