Other reviewers have complained about Copleston's style. They say that it's boring, dry or hard to read. This may be true to an extent, but consider the topic. It's Medieval Philosophy. I don't know who would ever be able to bring such a topic down to the level of most ADD Westerners today (including the previous reviewer who has a "bachelor's degree" in philosophy. [sarcasm] Thankfully he recommended a comic book introduction to philosophy in place of Copleston).

At any rate, I thoroughly enjoyed the volume. If you are attempting to get an introductory grasp on Western Philosophy, then the Medieval period cannot be skipped. If we do skip this time period by jumping from Neoplatonism to Francis Bacon and Modern philosophy, then we will not completely understand what it was that Renassance and Modern philosophy were reacting against. I must admit that Copleston's work is not exciting to read for it's own sake. But, for me any dullness was overshadowed by the importance and necessity of the topic. I am almost finished with the the author's third volume and I am very glad that I had read this second one first. I have always read scattered references to Duns Scotus' thinking and Albert the Great, etc., but now I feel much more confident in evaluating what happened in the middle ages. Furthermore, I just read Jaroslav Pelikan's volume on the development of Medieval Theology. It was an excellent complement to Copleston.

The work was originally written for seminary students. I am one and I certainly believe that prior exposure to many of the theological topics and questions helped me through the book. However, anyone with a general philosophical/theological framework and enough motivation and patience will be delightfully pleased by the end of the book (and remember if you see a term or topic that you are unfamiliar with, then just look it up on Wikipedia!).

The bottom line is, if you are both motivated and interested, then buy and read it (and read it slowly). The content and concepts presented are not what we normally think and talk about. It took me three times as long as it would normally take me to read a book of this length! It's a helpful and concise introduction to the topic. Unfortunately, if you are a casual reader, then you'll probably fall asleep like Mr. "bachelor's degree".

(By the way, the reviewer who says that Copleston imposes Kantian ideas on Aquinas' thought aparently skipped page 388. Here Copleston explicitly argues that such a Kantian analysis of Aquinas would be wrongheaded. He writes "Thomist principles cannot be developed in such a way as to afford answers to subjective idealism and Kantianism; but one should not be guilty of the anachronism of making the historic Thomas answer questions with which he was not actually faced." And I don't think that very many people are in a hurry to read Etienne Gilson's detailed treatments unless they are already beyond an introductory work such as Copleston.)

This is the second volume in Frederick Copleston's classic nine volume A History of Philosophy. Like all the volumes in this series, it is an exhaustive study of the period covered and presents the development of the philosophical thought of the period as an interrelated whole where trends ebb and flow as ideas are introduced and synthesized within the systems of the great thinkers of the time.

All of this is done within a framework where Copleston, as a professor in a Catholic seminary, is mindful of pointing out the elements that would become adopted within the framework of Christian philosophy and theology. Even though Copleston has a seminary audience in mind, he does not attempt to "Christianize" those who were not Christian nor launch polemical attacks against those ideas at odds with the Christian faith. He presents the philosophical ideas thoroughly and fairly and gives both the supporting evidence cited by supporters and the critiques by opponents. Also pointed out in detail is how each philosopher's work influenced contemporaries and later thought with, of course, special consideration of the influence for good or bad on Christianity.

This volume covers the patristic period through to the golden age of medieval scholasticism. Many histories of philosophy ignore the importance of medieval thought and end up treating the birth of modern philosophy with Descartes as if it arose in an historical vacuum. Copleston skillfully brings to life this neglected period of philosophical activity and this serves to give greater understanding to the historical and intellectual context of later developments.

Those who dismiss all philosophy that serves to aid Christian theology are guilty of neglecting the theological underpinnings in much of classical Greek thought. Though Plato and Aristotle were certainly not deists in the Judeo-Christian sense, their concepts of the demiurge and the prime mover cetainly have implications of a decidedly theological nature. Many patistic writers began to defend the faith using this philosophical framework and demonstrated that which is true and good is no threat to Christianity and argued that philosophy in its most pure form leads has God as proper end.

Copleston divides this volume into five parts. The first begins with a discussion of some of the most philosophical of the earlier patristic writers before beginning a long discussion of the thought of St. Augustine of Hippo. St. Augustine would remain the dominant figure in the Western Church until the scholastic period and many reactions to scholasticism both in the Reformation and among Catholics would appeal to the great bishop of Hippo as their intellectual forebearer. Copleston gives an excellent and thorough exposition and sheds light on almost every aspect of his thinking. A shorter treatment of Western thinkers in the immediate post-Augustinian period closes this section.

The next few centuries were barren periods for learning in the West but the few lights that shown through are covered in the next two sections on the Carolingian Renaissance and the early scholastic period. John Scotus Eruigena and St. Anselm are the most notable figures, respectively, for these two periods and the development of thinking on universals that would become the focus of much debate in the coming centuries.

The focus is turned in the fourth section to the recovery of the Aristotelian corpus. The important commentators on Aristotle from Islamic and Jewish sources are covered as well as the beginning of the translation of Aristotle's works. The reaction - both supportive and not - of the Christian West to this "new" learning is explained.

The fifth and final section of the book is the longest and, for a Catholic philosopher like Copleston, the most important. Here is the truly "golden age" of scholasticism as a series of great thinkers would take the stage to use philosophy to aid the Catholic faith. The three great figures of this period - St. Bonaventure, St. Thomas Aquinas, and John Duns Scotus - are given extensive coverage. The interraction of these three contemporaries and their solutions to the complex questions of the day - particularly that of universals - is fully explained. Lesser figures are also covered including two (St. Albert the Great and Roger Bacon) whose work in a primitive form of what we would later call "science" was very far ahead of its time.

For those with an interest in the factors that would give rise to the development of modern Western thinking, this book is a godsend. Nowhere else is such complete coverage of Christian philosophy of the period available. The only thing one could hope for is if there had been a full treatment of the great thinkers of the Eastern Church such as the Cappadocians. However, given the unfamiliarity of the West with the Eastern tradition at the time this was written, it is an understandable though regrettable omission.

For a thorough investigation of the history of Western philosophical thought and a wrestling with the great thinkers of the Western philosophical tradition, there is no better choice than Copleston's A History of Philosophy. For the Christian, in particular, who wishes to understand the interaction of philsophy and Christian theology, this work is unparalleled.

Copleston's series, "The History of Philosophy", is quite possibly the best introduction to the history of philosophical thought that has ever been published and certainly the best currently in print.

You will be hard pressed to find a better collection of solid philosophical surveys in one place. The beauty of the series is that Copleston has clearly done his research on each period and each thinker of Western philosophy.

I cannot recommend this series any more highly. It is a must-have collection for anyone who is a scholar (professional or casual) of philosophy, theology or any of the arts.

If this isn't on your bookshelf, it should be!

Father Copleston, S.J. wrote a readable account of an important era in intellectual history. Father Copleston's book is well organized and well written. He is clear that the phrase Middle Ages is misguiding. The approximate era of A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOLUME 2:MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY deals with approximately a thousand years (c.500 AD-1500 AD). This time frame can be divided by the Dark Ages, the Early Middle Ages or Frankish history, a Second Dark Ages, the High Middle Ages, etc.

Father Copleston begins his study with the Partistic Period (Ancient Western Civilization thinking) and the impact of St. Augustine (446-520) and his great book titled THE CITY OF GOD. Chapters one through ten give the reader a comprehensive examination of ideas and European thought at a time when learning could have very well disappeared in Western Europe. Father Copleston includes some of the important figures in the Patristic Era such as Isodore (570-636), Boethius (480-524)Cassoidorus (577-665), etc.

Father Copleston does a credible job in describing what is known as the Carolingian Renaissance. He mentions the valuable contributions of Alcuin (730-804) and Eriugena (815-877). The fact that Alcuin established a school at Aachen and developed bookhand as the format for handwritten books and study materials is invaluable in the teaching and learning for posterity. Eruigena was probably the first speculative philosopher in Western Europe since the disintegration of the Ancient Roman Empire. His work cannot be overestimated.

Father Copleston deals with the problems of "Universals" in the early Medieval schools. He also explains the debate between the Nominalists and the Realists. Father Copleston's examination of the Medieval curriculum is useful. Undergraduate students studied the Trivium (Grammar, Rhetoric, and Logic). Students were taught to read well, to think, to speak well, and the write well. Once these students mastered this curriculum, they could study the Quadrivium (Astronomy, Music, Arithmetic and Algerbra, and Plane Geometry). If these students pursued further studies, they could study Medicine, Canon Law, and Theology which was considered The Queen of the Sciences.

One should note that Medieval Catholic universities were centers of intellectual activity and spirited debate which has disappeared from the record. In other words, Father Copleston undermines that the Catholic Church authorities somehow undermined serious learning and thinking when in fact they encouraged it.

Father Copleston begins his treatment of Scholasticism with St. Anselm (1033-1109) whose PROLOGIAN was a serious study that at some point the Catholic Faith had to be reasonable to be accepted. This study began the fruitful development of Scholastic Philosophy. Mention should be made of Peter Abelard (1079-1142) whose SIC ET NON caused scandal until scholars realized that this was a "how to" book on solving complex philosophical and theological problems. One should know of Peter Lombard's (1100-160) FOUR BOOKS OF SENTENCES which became the standard text of Medieval theological studies.

Father Copleston does an outstanding job in presenting St. Albertus Magnus (1193-1280) and the Catholic Church's intellectual giant, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) whose SUMMA THEOLOGICAL and SUMMA CONTRAL GENTILES set the standard for subsequent theological and philosophical studies. St. Thomas Aquinas development an Aristotlian reasoned approach to Catholicism. The importance of the Angelic Doctor (St. Thomas Aquinas) was and is crucial to Catholcism and Catholic universities. Subsequent studies in Medieval theological studies were either defenses of crituques of the Angelic Doctor's work whose thinking became part of the permanent philosophy.

Father Copleston gives credit to Islamic scholars such as Avacena(980-1037) and Averroes(1126-1198) whom St. Thomas Aquinas called The Commentator-The Commentator on Aristotle. Father Copleston also gives serious mention of Jewish scholars such as Maimonides (1135-1204) who is mentioned by, among others, St. Thomas Aquinas.

Father Copleston tackeled a difficult historical task, and his book is one of the best this reviewer has read on Medieval Philosophy and theology. The book is comprehensive as well as a good introduction the History of Medieval Philosophy. A good companion volume is Father Duffy's THE QUEEN OF SCIENCES. This reviewer strongly recommends Father Copleston's HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOLUME 2.

I have now read the first two volumes of Copleston's History of Philosophy, and plan to read the remaining seven. Based on reviews and the monumental scope of the work itself, I had high expectations coming in, and I must say that the books have so far exceeded these expectations. My only prior experience with philosophy had been Bertrand Russell's history, which I thoroughly enjoyed, although in retrospect I gleaned more entertainment from it than any real knowledge of the history of philosophy. Copleston's work is much more academic and it does, to a degree, presuppose at least a cursory knowledge of the history of philosophy as well a foundation of philosophic terminology. However, if you are willing to put some work and thought into the books, especially at the outset, it is possible, I believe, to fully understand these volumes without a prior knowledge of the history of philosophy. For example, I've taken notes as I've read, and have found that many of the philosophical terms used, while not always defined explicitly, are used frequently enough that their meaning can be inferred satisfactorily.

I'll attempt to summarize what I took from this particular volume, that on Medieval philosophy: The philosophy of Aristotle represents a complete system and was the pinnacle of the ancient philosophies. However, his complete system was not known in the West until the twelfth century -only his logic and fragments of other parts was known before this and mostly indirectly. Philosophy in medieval Europe prior to this had been inextricably tied up with Christian theology -the Church fathers and medieval theologians had used what they knew of ancient philosophy to rationally support what they knew through revelation. Now confronted with Aristotle's complete system -a system derived without the aid of revelation -it was only a matter of time before thinkers began developing systems independently of Christian dogma. This began with St. Thomas Aquinas who attempted to reconcile Aristotle with Christian revelation. Despite the value of this -and Aquinas is still considered THE Catholic philosopher -Copleston argues that St. Thomas's system paved the way for future philosophers to develop philosophies independent of theology and even, in fact, to take the subject matter of theology as their own, for better or for worse.

One other comment I'd like to make: it is impossible to have a completely objective history of philosophy (or history of anything for that matter); the author picks and chooses what topics to include and emphasize, how to classify the topics, in what order, etc. Copleston was a Jesuit theologian and his expertise is medieval philosophy, especially Thomas Aquinas. Therefore, I fully expected a bias in this book towards that philosophy. This bias is present to a slight degree, as probably can't be helped; for example, Copleston will often show how a particular philosophic idea contrasts to the Scholastic philosophy. However, I can only recall one or two times where the author, in this or the previous volume, gives his own opinions as to the value of the philosophical ideas presented. Copleston simply states that this was the idea of this particular philosopher and leaves it at that. He will on occasion give his thoughts as to the importance or the future impact of an idea or philosopher, but that is the job of any good historian; he rarely assigns a value to a particular idea, and the few times he does, it is explicit that he is doing so.