Sorensen delivers a lightly written yet persistently head-scratching review of paradoxes in the Western tradition. In an apt simile, the author, a college professor, likens paradoxes in philosophy to prime numbers in mathematics; they build up the larger edifice. Paradoxes, however, are potentially weak materials for pondering the existence of God, the validity of common sense, the reliability of reason, or which door to choose on Let's Make a Deal. Although the contradictions that paradoxes pose may bemuse general readers, for philosophers, they are serious business indeed. Yet both audiences will be served by Sorensen's account. Everybody knows that Zeno's Paradox (which asserts motion is impossible) can't be true, yet, Sorensen reports, no philosopher could refute it until the late nineteenth century. The Zeno case epitomizes the author's approach: he centralizes a paradox as originated by, or associated with, two dozen historical philosophers, and calls the play-by-play of successors who wrestled it to the mat. High-interest material for recreational philosophers. Gilbert Taylor