Why is there Something rather than Nothing? By Leszek Kolakowski

When a question forms the title of a book, one reasonably expects to find that question answered within. But this being a philosophy book, you would be looking through those pages for a very long time. Pop philosophy seems to come in two varieties: books with short chapters on historical figures, and the rarer but no less formulaic attempt at whimsy. This is one of the former, though some thought has gone into making it appear as unthreatening as possible. There were 30 essays in the original Polish edition, but the British publisher apparently wanted a small book; hence the "23 questions from great philosophers".

Leszek Kolakowski is Poland's foremost philosopher, though living in the West since 1968, when his critiques of Marx became too much for the authorities and he was banned from teaching. He is also perhaps the most esteemed philosopher to have produced a general introduction to his discipline for the mass market since Bertrand Russell. So it is a surprise that the result is so attenuated, each chapter consisting of a brief presentation of the question, a sketch of its origin and suggestions for further thoughts. Sometimes this offers the opportunity for humour. The chief question raised by Schopenhauer's work, it seems, is whether his ideas even make any sense at all. It would have been interesting to see the culled chapter on Heidegger, whose work often punishes rather than repays careful study.

The best essay involves René Descartes, who brought everything he believed into doubt save his own existence, and from that keystone attempted to rebuild the edifice of human knowledge (including theology) on more secure, rational foundations. The destructive part of his project was so effective, and the reconstruction so unconvincing, that his protests that he was a true believer in the Christian faith were roundly dismissed. Since Descartes' effort to bolster Christian doctrine was far from poor enough to be taken for sarcasm, we can only assume that the philosopher was made a scapegoat for his readers' own cognitive dissonance.

Many of Kolakowski's concluding thoughts involve God. These days, the Almighty is rarely considered a proper subject of study for philosophers, except when used as a sparring partner for novices. Introductions to philosophy tend to use God as a punchbag. Yet Kolakowski promises that each idea is not a piece of purely historical information, but something that speaks to us today. The ideas may not be purely historical, but the emphasis on Christian concerns that the author draws out of them will seem antediluvian to many of his colleagues.

However, this is not to say that many readers will not be pleased by this break with tradition. Philosophers are generally a godless bunch, frustrated and embarrassed that quite a large proportion of those interested in philosophy are Christians. The publishing world's response to this religious market has been rather like that of Hollywood producers who scratched their heads over the success of Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ. Reading philosophy is often aspirational, but it does not do much for one's aspirations to be told continually that you are a moron.