Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “The First Philosophers: The Presocratics and Sophists” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

The First Philosophers: The Presocratics and Sophists

Robin Waterfield (Editor),

Anaximander,

Anaximenes,

Empedocles,

Gorgias of Leontini,

Heraclitus,

Parmenides,

Protagoras,

more…

3.94 · Rating details · 637 ratings · 42 reviews

Aristotle said that philosophy begins with wonder, and the first Western philosophers developed theories of the world which express simultaneously their sense of wonder and their intuition that the world should be comprehensible. But their enterprise was by no means limited to this proto-scientific task. Through, for instance, Heraclitus' enigmatic sayings, the poetry of P ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, Oxford World's Classics, 400 pages

Published November 30th 2000 by Oxford University Press (first published September 7th 2000)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The First Philosophers, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about The First Philosophers

Lists with This Book

The Basic Works of Aristotle by Aristotle

Ancient Greek Philosphy

115 books — 50 voters

Appendix A: The Theocratic Age (Harold Bloom's Western Canon)

89 books — 24 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 3.94 ·

Rating details

· 637 ratings · 42 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of The First Philosophers: The Presocratics and Sophists

Feb 05, 2019 Xander rated it liked it · review of another edition

The First Philosophers (2000) is a collection of the ideas of the most important Greek philosophers that lived before or were contemporaries of Socrates. This somewhat arbitrary distinction between pre-Socratic and post-Socratic philosophy becomes problematic when one reads about the ideas of these thinkers. Socrates, and even more so Plato, cannot be understood without connecting them to their predecessors – theirs was a reaction to developments in (mostly) natural philosophy – explaining the w ...more

flag 12 likes · Like · see review

Jan 11, 2015 Ted rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: general-philosophy

This is the second time I've read most of these philosophers. The first was back in college, when I first started reading philosophy. So reading this was very much like returning to an old friend. And as anyone will tell you, reconnecting with an old friend after years of being apart, I learned new things and understood old ideas in a completely new way.

THE PRESOCRATICS
There is something strangely pure about the curious and conjecturing mind before Aristotle's advent of the scientific method. Cl This is the second time I've read most of these philosophers. The first was back in college, when I first started reading philosophy. So reading this was very much like returning to an old friend. And as anyone will tell you, reconnecting with an old friend after years of being apart, I learned new things and understood old ideas in a completely new way.

THE PRESOCRATICS
There is something strangely pure about the curious and conjecturing mind before Aristotle's advent of the scientific method. Claims about the origin of the world and mankind are made without any solid evidence. The origin of the cosmos was a hot topic of the fifth and sixth centuries BCE, and some methods to solving this were deciding which single element was the root of all things ('arche'), or to attempt to eliminate what was simply impossible, in order to arrive at the truth. The debates are rather fascinating, and it's amazing what ideas were actually not far off--astronomy and mathematics find great roots in this era, and the Leucipus' and Democritus' theory of atoms is profoundly valid.
I've always been a fan of Heraclitus and his 'change is constant' mentality. 'It is impossible to step twice into the same river...it scatters and regathers, comes together and dissolves, approaches and departs.'
But the real winning quotes for me in this read (though in the same vein) were
'Listen now to a further point: no mortal thing
Has a beginning, nor does it end in death and obliteration;
There is only a mixing and then a separating of what was mixed,
But by mortal men these practices are named "beginnings".'
--Empedocles of Acragas
'In reality we know nothing, for the truth is hidden in the abyss.'
--Democritus

THE SOPHISTS
My previous experience with the Sophists was much more limited, and with a negative connotation. I was taught that they were only concerned with charging outrageous amounts for lessons, and thrived on confusing their debate opponents rather than actually making sound logic and good arguments. While this was true for some, there are some pearls of wisdom, and some of the early Sophists like Protagoras and Gorgias seem to me to genuinely want to progress the art of debate and lecturing. One of the main subjects covered by the Sophists was the conflict between 'nomos' and 'physis' ('convention' and 'nature'): is humanity's welfare better or worse by our social norms and laws (convention), or is our natural state better? The debate raises interesting points on both sides, of course. I think Gorgias was my favorite of the bunch; he really invested in the art of winning his audiences with beautiful language and emotional pull, which is vastly important. And Prodicus of Ceos told a story of Heracles and his choice between Vice and Virtue which was very compelling.

Obviously, this type of reading is for a niche market, and very heavy on the academic side. But it was always enjoyable for me to read, and I am once again reminded of how I was born in the wrong century. ...more

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Mar 28, 2020 kaelan rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

Fragment 1: Historically fascinating, with flashes of brilliance that transcend place and time, but many the longueur in-between.

Fragment 2: Zeno, Protagoras and Parmenides all the way.

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Mar 17, 2018 Phillip Johnson rated it really liked it

Shelves: philosophy

A compilation of fragments by the authors (very little original material remains). The collection is especially good for the Sophists and the introductory commentary is excellent.

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Nov 24, 2020 Nathan Albright rated it liked it

Shelves: challenge-2020

To call this book a translation is a bit misleading. To be sure, there are translations to be found here. But the general gist of a translation is that there is a bit of introductory material that helps explain the context of a work and then the reader has the chance to read the translated material and come to one's own conclusions. This book, it must be admitted, does not have that tendency that one is used to saying. Instead, every single section of this book--and there are a lot of sections h To call this book a translation is a bit misleading. To be sure, there are translations to be found here. But the general gist of a translation is that there is a bit of introductory material that helps explain the context of a work and then the reader has the chance to read the translated material and come to one's own conclusions. This book, it must be admitted, does not have that tendency that one is used to saying. Instead, every single section of this book--and there are a lot of sections here--has a somewhat heavy-handed introduction, sometimes as long as the translated material, that tries to frame how it is that the philosopher in question should be viewed, and then many of the translated materials themselves are not writings from the thinkers themselves but of quotations of the writer as cited by others, and then also how the writer was evaluated and viewed by other writers. The result is that one barely gets a chance to see the material of these ancient writers except beneath layers of interpretation, and that prevents the reader from getting to know these first philosophers at all, and that is a great shame, to the extent that they are worth getting to know.

This book is more than 300 pages long and is divided into two large parts with numerous smaller elements. The book begins with a preface and acknowledgements, after which there is an introduction, select bibliography, a note on the texts, and then timeline of the thinkers included here. After this material, which is nearly 50 pages of unnumbered pages, the book proper begins with an exploration of the pre-Socratic philosophers who survive--often barely--in the historical record. This part includes a look at the Milesians Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes, Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Zeno, Melissus, Pythagoras and his school, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, the atomists, and Diogenes. The second part of the book discusses the sophists, namely Protagoras, Gorgias, Prodicus, Hippias, Anitphon, Thrasymachus, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus. Each of the discussions contains three parts: an introduction that expresses the translator/editor's own view of each philosopher and his work, translations of fragments and writings from others that discuss and evaluate the philosopher, and then sources. After that the author discusses the Double Arguments and various anonymous and miscellaneous texts before the book ends with explanatory and textual notes, a concordance with Diels/Kranz, and an index of translated passages.

And that is an open question. Is it worth getting to know the first philosophers? The translator/editor obviously thinks so. If he views the presocratic philosophers as generally having the wrong answers, he appreciates their agnosticism and the questions that they ask of the earth. And it is similarly clear that the author appreciates the political aspects of the sophists, and seems also to want to defend the ethical interests of some of the philosophers who have been lumped into that school as well. All of that invites the question on the part of the reader as to whether a sophist who has ethical concerns and an appreciation of moral development that comes from philosophical learning is really a sophist at all. Even as a reader who has a certain degree of skepticism about the approach of most of these philosophers, it is clear that some of them are well worth knowing at times for the content of their thinking (Heraclitus, for example), and some for the questions that they brought up (Zeno, for example), but it is rare when a philosopher here has a moral perspective that is worth appreciating. There are a few, and those are to be treasured, but even here it depends on how one interprets their fragmentary thinking, whether kindly or not. ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Mar 18, 2020 Caroline added it

Shelves: classical, philip-ward-500-books, philosophy-religion

I read only the pre-Socratics, about two-thirds of the book. (Pre-Socratics specified for my Philip Ward 500 books reading project.)

Well presented book. Waterfield summarizes the opinions of each philosopher, then presents a selection of the available fragments of his works and the testimony (descriptions /interpretations) of what he said/wrote by later commentators, e.g. Aristotle, Simplicius, Diogenes Laertius.

I couldn’t read it late at night without falling asleep, but in small chunks earlie ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Aug 11, 2019 Matthew rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, greece-and-rome

Quite satisfied with this book. Not too long, not too short, and there's a good balance of fragments, testimonia and commentary. The Presocratic and Sophist philosophy itself is interesting enough, and I know I'll be referring back to parts of it when I get to Plato and Aristotle. It just gets annoying to read some of the incorrect physics and bad argumentation at times, but I suppose it's necessary to include in an overview of these thinkers and the questions they asked and gave answers for. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jan 07, 2021 Jacob added it · review of another edition

THE PRESOCRATICS AND THE SOPHISTS
580-400 BC

(08 January 2021)
It is remarkable that so much of this has come down to us, especially as most of these philosophers lived before the age of recorded history. But it seems that suddenly, as if emerging from the “Apeiron,” the entire discipline began in a flash and set off a 2,500 year tradition of inquiry and thought. This is a tedious read and much of what we have is either speculation on the makeup of the world (much of what is now ‘junk science’) or THE PRESOCRATICS AND THE SOPHISTS
580-400 BC

(08 January 2021)
It is remarkable that so much of this has come down to us, especially as most of these philosophers lived before the age of recorded history. But it seems that suddenly, as if emerging from the “Apeiron,” the entire discipline began in a flash and set off a 2,500 year tradition of inquiry and thought. This is a tedious read and much of what we have is either speculation on the makeup of the world (much of what is now ‘junk science’) or incomprehensible contemplation on the nature of being. Reading this now, it may be easy to patronizingly chuckle at Anaximedes’ assertion that the Sun was Earth-like until it caught fire from moving so fast through the air, but one must remember that he made that assertion when the prevailing thought was that the Sun was actually the corporeal avatar of Helios and his chariot.

They were all equally wondrous, curious, and totally irreverent. Xenophanes provides the perfect example:
“If cows and horses or lions had hands, or could draw with their hands and make things as men can, horses would have drawn horse-like gods, cows cow-like gods, and each species would have made the gods’ bodies just like their own. Ethiopians say that their gods are flat-nosed and black, and Thracians that theirs have blue eyes and red hair.”
Or, more brutally, Heraclitus:
“Corpses should be disposed of more readily than dung.”

Of these philosophers, I only found Aniximander and Heraclitus truly worth reading. Anaximander asserted that the “Apeiron,” the boundless, infinite, was the source of all else. He also somehow described the law of the conservation of energy (albeit primitively) and the water cycle.

Heraclitus famously asserted that the world was in constant flux and one could never step in the same river twice. Flux, chaos, or “war” -- as he puts it -- is the driving force of everything. “War is the father of all and king of all. Some he reveals as gods, others as men; some he makes slaves, others free.” This reminds me of a certain character from Blood Meridian. The only thing that unites all is the logos, the word (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God???”), the reason, the order. And Heraclitus of course cannot resist, as all philosophers cannot resist, pontificating on the superiority of the examined life: “the general run of people are as unaware of their actions while awake as they are of what they do while asleep.” But “everyone has the potential for self-knowledge and sound thinking.”

There are other interesting philosophers in this volume such as Parmenides (if you can figure him out, I could only penetrate the surface), the Pythagoreans, and the Atomists, but of them I will not speak.

The Sophists were more comprehensible but less interesting. The only one who I found to be worth reading was Protagoras, who asserted -- as we all know -- that “Man is the measure of all things -- of the things that are, that they are, and of the things that are not, that they are not.” This extraordinary statement of humanism, coming from a man born in 481 BC, reverbs down all the way to Dostoevsky’s theory of collective sin and Sartre’s doctrine of collective definition. Was Protagoras the first ‘postmodern’ thinker? He was certainly a relativist, as he asserted that there is no truth and all is perception. Despite this, Protagoras believes that good leaders can make their communities more ethical, an idea as prescient now as it was then. Protagoras seemed to develop the state of nature 2,000 years before Hobbes and even almost came to state his dictum “bellum omnium contra omnes.”

Aside from those mentioned above, most of these philosophers are not worth reading but for historical value. Most of their ideas are either scientifically useless or ethically surpassed by later thinkers. We do, however, owe enormous debt to these gentlemen for daring to ask. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Sep 19, 2013 Mark Rossiter rated it really liked it

This anthology, edited by the Greek scholar Robin Waterfield, consists of a series of extracts, with commentary, from the work of a number of Greek thinkers who lived in the couple of centuries before the first megastar of western philosophy, Socrates – hence the name by which they are known to us: Presocratics. Well, “a series of extracts” is pushing it, since not many of them wrote anything down, so the way we know what they thought is largely through secondhand (and no doubt distorted) accoun This anthology, edited by the Greek scholar Robin Waterfield, consists of a series of extracts, with commentary, from the work of a number of Greek thinkers who lived in the couple of centuries before the first megastar of western philosophy, Socrates – hence the name by which they are known to us: Presocratics. Well, “a series of extracts” is pushing it, since not many of them wrote anything down, so the way we know what they thought is largely through secondhand (and no doubt distorted) accounts, whether by disciples, critics (including Plato, Socrates’ chief scribe and the second megastar of western philosophy, who pitted some of them in dialogue against his hero), or historians writing many centuries later. What survives is a series of fragments, like the cracked mosaics of some ancient palace floor.

That’s enough, though, to throw light on their strange and distant world. And yet in some ways not so distant: for these men (all men) were the first to think like we do. Anyone who has read their precursors, the great Greek epic poets Homer and Hesiod, knows that the gods pulled all the strings: whatever a phenomenon might appear to be, it ultimately had a supernatural cause. We don’t know what it was that triggered the shift away from mythological thinking to the search for explanations in nature; but somehow, with the Presocratics, it happened, and it’s been with us ever since.

Some of the wackier beliefs of Pythagoras’ followers sound like those of a new age cult (the moon “is inhabited, just like our earth, but by creatures and plants which are taller and more beautiful; for creatures there are fifteen times as strong as those here, and never excrete anything, and their day is fifteen times longer than ours”), but they also laid the basis for much of modern mathematics, including mathematical relationships in music. And while some Presocratic scientific speculations sound quaintly cute to modern ears (“the sun is larger than the Peloponnese”, exclaims Anaxagoras), others were spot on (“the moon does not have its own light, but gains it from the sun” – Anaxagoras again), while still others are almost eerie in their prescience (Anaxagoras hypothesized a “big bang” origin for the universe – though set in motion by Mind – while Democritus posited atoms in motion and the combination of elements, and even asserted that the Gods – like us – were the products of atomic combination). There’s a mystical streak too – most of these thinkers believed that everything is one, and that nothing can come into being from non-being – but without that precluding a fair dose of common sense: Heraclitus held that “what awaits men after death cannot be anticipated or imagined”.

The Sophists, by contrast – or at least their flashier representatives – come across as superficial, boorish trivializers, interested only in egotistical point-scoring and well deserving of the opprobrium in which history has held them; though again, since we lack original sources, it’s hard to know how much of this impression is based on malevolent caricature.

For the most part, though, these distant philosophers seem just like us, fumbling with all their native curiosity and ingenuity towards the most coherent explanations of the universe they can find; but they were there first, and we owe them. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Sep 08, 2017 Luke rated it liked it · review of another edition

The presentation of the philosophy was succinct, perhaps overly so, but overall the book is a good survey of the Presocratics and Sophists. As for the philosophy itself, some of it is painfully outdated and sometimes a bit frustrating to read (well, it is 2500 years old), whilst some of it left me astounded as to how relevant the queries and conclusions still are today. Overall a fascinating read.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

May 15, 2017 Starlight Glimmer rated it it was amazing

Great collection with glosses of their general beliefs supplemented by selected testimonies and fragments in their own words. Informative of the philosophical tradition Plato and Aristotle engage with and how they interpret them.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Oct 01, 2020 christina rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

Originally suggested as a book for a philosophy group I'm in (but was rejected out of hand), I found this book to be incredibly thorough and enjoyable as a treatise on the emergence of metaphysics coupled with humans' evolutionary growth.

How incredible our minds are. I often take for granted everything that has been culled through the thousands of years of human intellectual and metaphysical development. What's amazing is how Waterford traces how humans learned about the world around them throug Originally suggested as a book for a philosophy group I'm in (but was rejected out of hand), I found this book to be incredibly thorough and enjoyable as a treatise on the emergence of metaphysics coupled with humans' evolutionary growth.

How incredible our minds are. I often take for granted everything that has been culled through the thousands of years of human intellectual and metaphysical development. What's amazing is how Waterford traces how humans learned about the world around them through quasi-mystical 'science' via the observable sensory details, then moving towards why those observed objects/beings exist and how they exist, to how they attempted to understand their place in the world as a result of these observations, to explaining purpose (and not always towards virtuous behaviour [see late Sophists]), and most importantly, the growing awareness of virtue that would eventually lay the foundations for Socrates and the emergence of Western Philosophy. Remarkable.

It's true these are only fragments as nothing exists in entire textual format but I didn't find this to be much of a hindrance. Waterford, in his extensive research has done a lot of the work for us: he has culled every scrap of reference of textual and tangential evidence for the reader. While he does do a summation of the evidence, he provides the reader with the ability to question him and his analysis: you can literally do reference work via his interpretation, his inserted fragments, or refer to other texts that he has painstakingly cited for you.

My inner research-fangirl loves this.

The most illuminating philosophers for me are:
Parmenides: For his observations on truth, appearance, the senses, and an attempt to explain a whole
Zeno: For his paradoxes that will eventually lead to the power of rhetoric
Protagoras: For a real, comprehensive analysis on the import of words and their meanings
Gorgias: For bringing up the paradox of 'being' and 'not-being'
Hippias: For the amusing exchange between Socrates and he, reminding me of Mr Bennett's and Mr Collin's discussion on compliments ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 28, 2021 Braden Turner rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Fascinating and informative survey of the presocratics and sophists. I wish I would have started with this book before ever dipping into Plato and Aristotle — for one, P&A mischaracterize many of these thinkers for their own ends; and two, P&A are much easier to comprehend in a meaningful way with knowledge of their influences. Even further than them, one can see the influence these thinkers had on many later philosophers and philosophical systems. The presocratics and sophists are truly the bui ...more

flag Like · see review

Oct 14, 2019 Rebecca rated it really liked it

Shelves: classics

This collection showcases a range of ancient thinkers and I like that each one is introduced with a summary of what is known about them and what sort of topics they explored. For many of them, the surviving evidence is very limited - in one case, we're not sure if two named philosophers may actually have been the same person. In many cases, we only know about them from quotations and mentions by later writers, whose portrayals may not always have been accurate. The fragments and essays range fro ...more

flag Like · see review

Jul 02, 2020 Jerry rated it liked it

Shelves: read-2020

"Aristotle explains the Pythagorean injunction to abstain from beans as being due either to the fact that they resemble the genitals in shape, or because they resemble the gates of Hades"

Incredible.

I had to trudge through this at times but there were enough nuggets hidden throughout to keep me going. Zeno's paradoxes were interesting. Shoutout to Prodicus for inventing the dictionary. I thought many of Democrates' stances were eerily accurate/relatable to the present. Same goes for Empedocles.

"M ...more

flag Like · see review

Dec 12, 2018 Erik rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: nonfiction, philosophy

An excellent and intriguing account of the early development of western thought. There is a good balance between original writings, secondary sources and commentary by the translator. While I understand why they were included the numerous recounts of ancients trying to figure the universe out (slightly varied versions of layer upon layer of fire, water, etc with the earth in the center, with one guy casually suggesting multiverses) got tedious quite fast.

My boy Antiphon knows what's up. ...more

flag Like · see review

May 01, 2020 Guy Sandison rated it liked it · review of another edition

The fragments and testimonia are ok, but by their nature are repetitive and incomplete.

I found Waterfield’s expostulations to be dumbing down the content too much, and underselling the fragments he spent months translating.

Would recommend that you read each chpter in reverse order; first the philosopher(s)’s fragments, then go back and read what Waterfield has to say about them.

flag Like · see review

Dec 29, 2020 Derek rated it really liked it · review of another edition

In terms of enjoyment it's closer to 3 stars, as the fragments we have are questionable, apocryphal perhaps. However, the fragments are well curated and it's incredible to discover how modern the ancients were and to learn about some of the earliest cosmological and metaphysical theories. And you also will learn that the Sophists were more sophisticated in their thought -- that they weren't all amoral either -- than the Platonic tradition represented them to be. ...more

flag Like · see review

Oct 27, 2018 Michael Potts rated it it was amazing

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

flag Like · see review

Sep 27, 2019 Alex rated it it was amazing

Clear and Concise, a very good review of those Philosophers who wrote before Plato ( Socrates). I would have no hesitation in recommending this general overview of early Greek thinking to anyone interested in Philosophy. Well worth the small cost for such an informative book.

flag Like · see review

Apr 14, 2020 Karthick rated it it was amazing

If you need to understand why did Western philosophers over 2000 years think the way they thought and say the things they said, you must read Plato and Aristotle. If you need to understand why did Plato and Aristotle think the way they thought and say the things they said, you must read this book.

flag Like · see review

Apr 14, 2021 Jay Ahn rated it liked it

The book's chapters are layed out so that Waterfield introduces each philosopher and then presents the related writings. However, those writings are a bit too fragmented, and a content + commentary format would have made it much less tiring to read. ...more

flag Like · see review

May 31, 2017 Mariah rated it it was amazing

So amazing to read and fathom. Unimaginable that these ancient people already knew about our monumental discoveries of today. Makes us seem rather dim witted and limited in our knowledge.

flag Like · see review

Dec 28, 2018 Stephen Antczak rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Excellent overview of the Pre-Socratics and Sophists.

flag Like · see review

Apr 29, 2019 Riley Hughes rated it really liked it · review of another edition

It's format, with frequent cross-references, can get tiresome (especially when read on a digital platform), but for its length it could not provide a better base for future study. ...more

flag Like · see review

Jun 30, 2019 Maddie rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Brilliant introduction to the pre-socratics, would recommend to everyone that want to go through philosophy in a more chronological order

flag Like · see review

Sep 24, 2019 Sidney Crestani rated it really liked it

Shelves: reference

Great commentary on and translation of the essential fragments of presocratic philosophy

flag Like · see review

Oct 08, 2019 Emma rated it it was amazing

Amazing book for my Greek Philosophy class!

flag Like · see review

Jan 22, 2021 Darkhanius rated it really liked it

Shelves: philosophy

Presocratics (especially Pythagoras) - Based
Sophists - Cringe

flag Like · see review

Jan 27, 2021 Andy rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Shelves: classics, greek-rome, non-fiction

I'm just gonna finally admit I don't like greek philosophy, its ruining my interest in the subject of philosophy as a whole. This edition is very well put together though. ...more

flag Like · see review

« previous 1 2 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend It | Stats | Recent Status Updates

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Philosophy

197 users

History

25 users

Classics

24 users

Nonfiction

21 users

Cultural > Greece

7 users

History > Ancient History

4 users

Literature > Ancient

4 users

Anthologies

3 users

Reference

3 users

Academic > School

3 users

See top shelves…

About Robin Waterfield

Robin Waterfield

202 followers

Robin Anthony Herschel Waterfield was born in 1952 and studied Classics at the University of Manchester, specializing in ancient Greek Philosophy. He lectured at Newcastle University and St Andrews before joining Penguin Books as an editor.

Books by Robin Waterfield

The Greek Myths: Stories of the Greek Gods and Heroes Vividly Retold

Dividing the Spoils: The War for Alexander the Great's Empire

More…

News & Interviews

33 Sweeping Multigenerational Family Dramas

Why not focus on some serious family drama? Not yours, of course, but a fictional family whose story you can follow through the generations of...

Trivia About The First Philoso...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from The First Philoso...

“The most accurate criterion by which to judge if a man has good sense is to see whether he resists his heart’s immediate impulses towards pleasure and has proved capable of self-control and self-mastery. But the man who tends to gratify his heart’s impulses is the man who tends towards the worse, not the better, course of action.” — 12 likes

“The man who has never desired or experienced anything base and bad is not a man of restraint, because he has never had to master anything to compose himself.” — 9 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — The First Philosophers by Robin Waterfield

The First Philosophers: The Presocratics and Sophists

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Robin Waterfield

Books by Robin Waterfield

News & Interviews

Trivia About The First Philoso...

Quotes from The First Philoso...

See a Problem?

Preview — The First Philosophers by Robin Waterfield

The First Philosophers: The Presocratics and Sophists

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Robin Waterfield

Books by Robin Waterfield

News & Interviews

Trivia About The First Philoso...

Quotes from The First Philoso...

new topic
Discuss This Book