Introduction

Abstract

What justification is there for writing another history of Western philosophy, and especially one that appears to repeat the same material in the same order that so many others have done before? Indeed, is not the very idea of a history of Western philosophy disreputable, outdated, and exhausted? Does it not ground itself in fantasies of totality and truth that are no longer appropriate or sound in a pluralist world? Is the history of Western philosophy not in fact the master narrative of all master narratives, and really only an apology for the imperialism of Western reason? Finally, is not the history of Western philosophy imbued with the arrogance of the idea that reason in Western civilization marks the highest form of social and political organization yet achieved on earth, and perhaps that mankind is capable of at all? Why, then, waste time and resources repeating a project that, in falling into such disrepute, is at best redundant and at worst dead?