Negative Positive
Title: Unfairly biased, and more readable than informative
Review: Hunt tries to do a good job in making the subject matter interesting, but in doing so he devotes so much space to anecdotes that he leaves out a lot of more pertinent information. Also, he does not give a neutral history of psychology, but instead displays empirical biases and a bias of psychology as a science throughout the book, writing at more length about philosophers and psychologists who agree with him and dismissing, ridiculing, and understating those who do not. For a non-biased history of the philosophical roots of psychology, try Robert MacLeod's Persistant Problems of Psychology. Unfortunately, though, that book only has the philosophic background of psychology and does not enter into the history of psychology in the 20th century.
Is the review positive or negative? 