Talk:William Barrett (philosopher)

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Philosophy: Philosophers / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophers
	Contemporary philosophy

Disambiguation[edit]

The philosopher is to be distinguished from William Edmund Barrett, the New York born American author of fiction (Lilies of the Field, The Left Hand of God) who lived roughly during the same era. --Blainster (talk) 23:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited out the statement that was in the previous saved version: "In his book, The Illusion of Technique he summarized a lifetime of philosophical thinking in one sentence: "Amid all the definitions proposed for man the most truthful would in fact be that he is the religious animal." The quote neither represents the main thrust of what the Illusion of Technique was about, nor does it well capture anything like Barrett's "lifetime" of philosophical thinking. This is not to dispute the importance of the religious centre of one's philosophy to Barrett, but his work and Illusion of Technique were a lot more than this simplistic statement implies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellacoolaman (talk • contribs) 20:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]