|
Real Ethics: Rethinking the foundations of
morality. John Rist. 2002. Cambridge University Press. 295 pp.
A discussion of the philosophical foundations for objectivity in ethics.
The author tries to tackle a pressing problem in moral philosophy: whether
our ethics is truly grounded in reality, and therefore transcends
individual preference and cultural diversity, or whether it is arbitrary.
He shows rather well that a view of human behavior is necessarily linked to
our view of man, and that is necessarily linked to metaphysical and/or
religious outlook. In fact, modern thinkers (and he takes a very honest
look at a wide range of positions) that seem to reject tradition actually
require these philosophical foundations that they claim to reject, without
which their own theory would be meaningless.
Human Nature and the
Freedom of Public Religious Expression. Stephen G. Post. 2002.
University of Notre Dame Press. 152 pp.
Arguments and evidence to the effect that religion is a natural part of
humanity, and need not be shut out of public life.
Many modern democracies are now very pluralistic societies. To ensure every
citizen‘s right to practice religion freely, even if his or her religion
only represents a minority of the society, governments are usually required
by law not to impose or even favor any particular religion. Exactly how
this "non-establishment" principle works in practice is sometimes
a matter of controversy. A strict separation policy might reach extremes of
cutting all public funds for any religion-affiliated educational or social
welfare program, even though many tax-paying citizens may prefer such
programs. If religious symbols are visible in public areas, atheists may
feel uncomfortable, but if all such references are forcibly removed
religionists may say the state is unfairly imposing a lifestyle in which
people pretend God were irrelevant.
Stephen Post offers ample evidence, especially from the neurosciences, to
show that religious activity is natural to people, and that therefore it is
unreasonable to prohibit or marginalize it, or take the attitude that it
must be confined to the private, individual realm.
Praise and Blame: Moral
Realism and Its Applications. Daniel N. Robinson. 2003. Princeton
University Press. 225pp.
The author attempts in this book to formulate a theory that would justify
value judgments.
In our pluralistic age, we note a hesitation to use the words
"right" and "wrong", or to call certain acts
"good" or "bad", yet we cannot avoid praising certain behavior
or blaming people for acts they should not have committed. Reluctant to use
clear terms like "right" and "wrong," a teacher might
tell a student that his or her behavior is"unhelpful,"
"unhealthy," or "inappropriate," but beneath such
fuzziness the fact that the student was censured remains, and the clearest
reason for not engaging in such activity is still moral (the student just
mentioned could easily answer "So what? Why do I have to be helpful,
or healthy, or comply to your standards of appropriateness?).
Robinson looks at the reasons why modern intellectuals find morality
problematic. He points out, for instance, that the fact that sciences are
values-free shouldn’t inhibit us from making value judgments where
appropriate, since reality is plural in form, and thus techniques of
scientific investigation might not apply to moral analysis.
The book looks especially
at determinism − the view that our actions, psychology and even identity as
persons is merely the result of our environment or upbringing, and
therefore we do not really choose freely and cannot be considered morally
responsible. In a detailed series of reflections, the author makes the
claim that we do indeed have sufficient control to be truly considered
moral agents.
|