Here is a review left by a customer on a product. Would you say he was satisfied or dissatisfied?
Title: Whose History?
Review: This book has many clever and interesting arguments and will be thought provoking for anybody who reads it. However the book seriously misrepresents or misinterprets some of the philosophical figures it covers. Misinterpretation by itself is not a sin. But what is objectionable about the misinterpretations here is that they seem to come with an almost total ignorance of some of the best, most meticulous historical research on the figures discussed in the book. The author might claim that meticulous historical research is not his goal. Rather, his goal is to present a certain unifying picture and teleology for the history of analytic philosophy. But these two goals are not necessarily mutually exclusive (though they might be in fact, in which case so much the worse for teleology). Whether or not you think teleology has a place in history of philosophy, surely you must agree that good historical research does. And such research is just what this book is missing.
