Think: In The Think Introduction By Simon Blackburn

ES: Think: Introduction
In the Think Introduction the author, Simon Blackburn , attempts to provide us with a brief overview of the contents of the the novel. He also gives a base explanation for philosophy and its foundations. Blackburn begins by explaining the main purpose of the book. He wants both men and women to be able to understand “big themes”. These are subjects such as autonomy, certitudes, and morality. Blackburn believes that by reading this text, if done correctly, the audience will have a clear understanding of these “big themes” and be quite able digest complicated philosophy texts at their leisure. (Blackburn 1) I believe that Blackburn accomplishes his goal.
Blackburn then continues this introduction by creating a familiarity with the reader. This will set the tone for the following text. He is not talking at the audience, but rather conversing with them. Blackburn forges this familiarity by placing himself on the level of the reader, in this case “philosophers and philosophy students” (Blackburn 2). He states that they share an instant of “silent embarrassment” when a person naively inquires as to their occupation or area of study. Blackburn then offers the description “conceptual engineering” as a possible response. He elaborates by indicating that this is what philosopher are, the engineers of logical

thought. He then explains that, like engineers, philosophers attempt to comprehend the various components of logical thought, and with these investigations predict the outcomes or “structures”. Blackburn goes onto say that the book can be utilized on its own or with additional text. Either way, following the readers completion of the book , the reader should be sufficiently prepared to exam classic philosophical literature.
In the ensuing sections Blackburn produces several examples of philosophical questions. He separates them into categories such as “questions any of us might ask about ourselves”, “questions about the world”, and “questions about ourselves and the world”. Blackburn uses these rhetorical example questions as an inception into his next point. These are not queries that can be answered by the usual systems. The aren’t questions of known mathematics or established science. In short, the are not “empirical” or questions of defined logic (Blackburn 3). They entail some deliberation. There aren’t neon signs that state “the answer is over here” and, as Blackburn suggests, the difficulty in locating these answer might stem from a lack of recognized procedures for finding them. Perhaps philosophers are unsure of where to even start looking and what would indicate that they found the answers (Blackburn 4). From where do philosophers glean these bemusing queries? Blackburn believes that they are born of “self-reflection” (Blackburn 4).
Blackburn uses this string of rhetorical questions and exposition provide a snapshot as to what will be examined in the book.

In this introduction he continues to reference back to the analogy between philosophy and engineering. Blackburn uses this technique to provide a visual which is easy to understand, thereby expanding his audience past that of the seasoned philosopher. He expands on this technique by emphasizing on the base simplicity of philosophy, Socrates being his primary example:“Socrates...did not pride himself on how much he knew. On the contrary, he prided himself on being the only one who knew how little he knew.” (Blackburn

5)
The author follows this by attempting to justify the study of philosophy. He does this by pointing out that if we want to place a high value on our “physical health”, then why not do the same for our “emotional health”. Blackburn is not naive and quickly acknowledges the shortfalls of this “ pure-minded reply” (Blackburn 6). He offers that the stated argument, serves mainly to preach to the choir. He then supplies a “middle-ground reply”, one which effectively states that philosophy is not a dead-end study. Blackburn goes on to give supporting examples. He sights Western philosophers, Copernicus, and instances within medical science. (Blackburn 10)
His final answer is “low-ground”(Blackburn 10). This reply examines the idea that they use philosophy to “step back” and check their own beliefs against those of others, or reevaluate their legitimacy (11). For this, Blackburn uses Goya as an example. He concludes this speculation with the notion that individuals opposed to philosophy, often do so because of their own insecurities. By highlighting this fact, he utilizes a reverse-psychology which implies that a rejection of philosophy is an acceptance of ignorance.
Blackburn concludes his argument with the following statement: “ It is only when we can see our situation steadily and see it whole that we can start to think what to do about it.” (Blackburn 12) This precisely supports the study of philosophy and, by extension, the reading of this book. I feel that in this Introduction to Think, Blackburn adequately persuades the reader to the notion that philosophy is an important factor in the human experience, and the following text will be beneficial in the understanding of it. He provides numerous examples and supports evidence without losing the reader in lofty diction or complex theories.