Two philosophers, one blind since just after birth, exchange views more over their philosophic differences than their perceptual ones. Oxford professor and social activist Magee looked for a counterpart and correspondent in Milligan, the head of philosophy at the University of Leeds and a campaigner for the rights of the blind. This resultant, diverging book collects their brief correspondence (cut short by Milligan's death), starting with empirical questions over sighted and blind perceptions of the world and the differences in comprehending and describing it. Their dialogue quickly and unsurprisingly veers from the stated topics into a purely philosophic debate over types of knowledge and theories of epistemology. Milligan, citing Bertrand Russell, subscribes to the idea that all knowledge is effectively propositional, distinct from sensory experience and easily transferred; Magee, preferring Kant and Schopenhauer, distinguishes between the separate knowledges by acquaintance and by description, i.e. ``knowing'' vs. ``knowing that/about.'' Their temperamental differences likewise emerge quickly: Milligan is an analytic and combative debater, sensitive to any presumption about blindness from the sighted; Magee is a sympathetic, flexible investigator, ready to change topics and tactics. Although their philosophic differences are eventually put aside unreconciled, the two find useful common ground in discussing problems the recently blind have in adjusting, with special attention to John Hull's memoir of going blind, Touching the Rock. Milligan at his best (when not arguing over logical positivism) fascinatingly conveys the experience of his condition without making excuses for his handicap; he offers intense descriptions of the feel of different spaces, of ``hearing'' obstacles, and of his own dreams. Milligan and Magee's tangling with philosophic theories of knowledge detracts from their intelligent, unfortunately truncated dialogue of the experience of sightlessness.
Pub Date: Oct. 1, 1995
ISBN: 0-19-509890-0
Page Count: 192
Publisher: Oxford Univ.
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 1, 1995
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis...
Privately published by Strunk of Cornell in 1918 and revised by his student E. B. White in 1959, that "little book" is back again with more White updatings.
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis (whoops — "A bankrupt expression") a unique guide (which means "without like or equal").Pub Date: May 15, 1972
ISBN: 0205632645
Page Count: 105
Publisher: Macmillan
Review Posted Online: Oct. 28, 2011
Kirkus Reviews Issue: May 1, 1972
This is not the Nutcracker sweet, as passed on by Tchaikovsky and Marius Petipa. No, this is the original Hoffmann tale of 1816, in which the froth of Christmas revelry occasionally parts to let the dark underside of childhood fantasies and fears peek through. The boundaries between dream and reality fade, just as Godfather Drosselmeier, the Nutcracker's creator, is seen as alternately sinister and jolly. And Italian artist Roberto Innocenti gives an errily realistic air to Marie's dreams, in richly detailed illustrations touched by a mysterious light. A beautiful version of this classic tale, which will captivate adults and children alike. (Nutcracker; $35.00; Oct. 28, 1996; 136 pp.; 0-15-100227-4)
Pub Date: Oct. 28, 1996
ISBN: 0-15-100227-4
Page Count: 136
Publisher: Harcourt
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 15, 1996
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
© Copyright 2026 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Follow
Popular in this Genre
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
