Ethical Theory: Classical and Contemporary Readings

Rating:
Summary: Provides a well-balanced overview of ethical theory.
Review: Pojman takes a variety of selections from opposing viewpoints to create a well-balanced text that serves as an excellent resource for an introductory philosophy or ethics class. Includes sources from early classical philosophers to contemporary authors.

Rating:
Summary: Making Money On Others
Review: Pojman's book, Ethical Theory: Classics and Contemporary Perspectives, does what Pojman's anthologies typically do, capitalizes on the work of others. Is this immoral? That is open for dispute, but you will not find that in this book.

What you will find, however, is a collection of essays ranging from relativism to egoism, from teleological to virtue theory, moral skepticism to moral objectivity, God to nihilism, sociobiology to feminism and a short section on free will. The range of the essays covers classic texts to contemporary works such as Harman and Mavrodes.

This is a good book for getting well-rounded in ethical theories. Pojman provides nice summaries of the section at the introduction, followed by a brief overview of the following readings.

One of the weak sections of this book concerns "The Challenges of Determinism to Moral Responsibility," but that is covered thoroughly in other anthologies (such as Fischer's book, Perspectives on Moral Responsibility). Nevertheless, this book has a well rounded selection of texts.

If you can afford this book, it is worth the money.
(THIS REVIEW REFERS TO THE 4TH EDITION).

Rating:
Summary: Making Money On Others
Review: Pojman's book, Ethical Theory: Classics and Contemporary Perspectives, does what Pojman's anthologies typically do, capitalizes on the work of others. Is this immoral? That is open for dispute, but you will not find that in this book.

What you will find, however, is a collection of essays ranging from relativism to egoism, from teleological to virtue theory, moral skepticism to moral objectivity, God to nihilism, sociobiology to feminism and a short section on free will. The range of the essays covers classic texts to contemporary works such as Harman and Mavrodes.

This is a good book for getting well-rounded in ethical theories. Pojman provides nice summaries of the section at the introduction, followed by a brief overview of the following readings.

One of the weak sections of this book concerns "The Challenges of Determinism to Moral Responsibility," but that is covered thoroughly in other anthologies (such as Fischer's book, Perspectives on Moral Responsibility). Nevertheless, this book has a well rounded selection of texts.

If you can afford this book, it is worth the money.
(THIS REVIEW REFERS TO THE 4TH EDITION).

Rating:
Summary: Good All-in-One Anthology
Review: This is a very useful anthology: it is broad in scope, and, when one considers the number of issues broached, its coverage of the most central issues in philosophical ethics is often surprisingly deep.

Pojman's appears to have had three primary objectives in editing this anthology: (i) to provide an overview of the main positions in normative ethics, (ii) to provide an overview of some of the main issues in meta-ethics, and (iii) to present discussions of a few traditional questions about morality (e.g. Does morality conflict with self-interest? Do moral truths require the existence of God? Do we need a robust sort of free will in order to be morally responsible for what we do?).

The book covers what are currently taken to be the big three positions in normative ethics: utilitarianism (and consequentialism more generally), deontology, and virtue ethics. (There's no section on contractualism/contractarianism, though there are selections from Gauthier, Harman, Hobbes, and Kant. So some of the relevant literature is present here.) These sections include a few papers defending each position, a few papers criticizing them, and in some cases responses to those criticisms. Of the three sections, the one on utilitarianism is the best and most comprehensive. The sections on deontology and virtue ethics are less comprehensive, but they're still good enough to provide an introduction to those positions and some significant objections to them.

The book's coverage of issues in meta-ethics is perhaps better than its coverage of issues in normative ethics. Pojman has included sections on several issues in meta-ethics, including relativism, the nature of value, realism vs. antirealism, and a section on positions on the fact/value distinction. This last section serves two distinct purposes: it introduces the debate between cognitivists and noncognitivists, and it provides a brief outline of the history of twentieth-century meta-ethical debate. The section begins with some passages from Hume's treatise concerning the respective roles of reason and emotion in ethics, it then covers several of the most important and influential positions in twentieth-century meta-ethics: Moore's intuitionist non-naturalism is represented by some passages from Principia in which he presents the Open Question Argument; Ayer's emotivism is represented by his defense of that position in Language, Truth, and Language; Hare's prescriptivism is presented in a short introductory to his views; and the naturalistic rejoinder to these meta-ethical views is represented by some work of Geoffrey Warnock.

The section on the realism/anti-realism debate is centered on contemporary work. This section doesn't include anything from contemporary defenders of noncognitivism; instead, it is set up as a debate between cognitivists who defend realism and those who defend anti-realism. This section includes classic anti-realist arguments from Mackie, Harman, and Williams along with responses to each of their arguments, and it concludes with the final chapter from Smith's The Moral Problem.

The book's coverage of issues concerning morality that aren't part of the areas discussed above is somewhat less consistent. (This is no doubt due, at least in part, to an attempt to cover quite a bit in a limited amount of space.) Other issues covered include the relation between morality and self-interest, the relation between morality and religion, freedom of the will, feministic ethics, and sociobiology. None of these issues is covered as extensively as any of the issues mentioned above, and the coverage of some of them consists of only a couple of papers. Still, the papers included do allow one to get some sense of the issues in these areas.

The book also includes some not very extensive historical coverage. Pojman has included something from several of the historical figures who are considered absolute essential in philosophical study of ethics. So you've got your Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Hume, Kant, and Mill. (It is worth noting that, where translations are necessary, the translations are mostly older ones, like Jowett's translations of Plato's Crito, Euthyphro, and The Republic; Ross's translation of Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics; and Paton's translation of Kant's Groundwork.) The book attempts to integrate these historical figures into its discussion of particular subjects, and it does so by treating the works of these figures as introductions to the issues. Consequently, the first reading in most of the book's sections is from a historically important philosopher. Mill gets the first word on utilitarianism; Hobbes on egoism; Aristotle on virtue ethics; etc. There's enough historical coverage here to give people a flavor of the major figures' views, but this book certainly isn't intended an anthology for a course in the history of ethics. In fact, nearly all the readings come from twentieth century figures.

If there is a noteworthy problem with this anthology, it's that some of its sections are rather superficial. In particular, the section on relativism and the section on the relation between morality and religion are underdeveloped. Both of these are shorter sections, and some of the the papers in these sections simply aren't very good philosophy. Those looking to understand the debates in these areas will probably have to look to other readings on these topics. In addition, the section on egoism is pretty small--though the individual papers in that section are all good.

These relatively minor worries shouldn't dissuade people from using this book, however, as its coverage in all other areas is more than adequate. The book is well-suited for use in survey courses in ethics that are aimed at undergraduate students, especially if one intends to cover issues in both normative ethics and meta-ethics.

Rating:
Summary: Good All-in-One Anthology
Review: This is a very useful anthology: it is broad in scope, and, when one considers the number of issues broached, its coverage of the most central issues in philosophical ethics is often surprisingly deep.

Pojman's appears to have had three primary objectives in editing this anthology: (i) to provide an overview of the main positions in normative ethics, (ii) to provide an overview of some of the main issues in meta-ethics, and (iii) to present discussions of a few traditional questions about morality (e.g. Does morality conflict with self-interest? Do moral truths require the existence of God? Do we need a robust sort of free will in order to be morally responsible for what we do?).

The book covers what are currently taken to be the big three positions in normative ethics: utilitarianism (and consequentialism more generally), deontology, and virtue ethics. (There's no section on contractualism/contractarianism, though there are selections from Gauthier, Harman, Hobbes, and Kant. So some of the relevant literature is present here.) These sections include a few papers defending each position, a few papers criticizing them, and in some cases responses to those criticisms. Of the three sections, the one on utilitarianism is the best and most comprehensive. The sections on deontology and virtue ethics are less comprehensive, but they're still good enough to provide an introduction to those positions and some significant objections to them.

The book's coverage of issues in meta-ethics is perhaps better than its coverage of issues in normative ethics. Pojman has included sections on several issues in meta-ethics, including relativism, the nature of value, realism vs. antirealism, and a section on positions on the fact/value distinction. This last section serves two distinct purposes: it introduces the debate between cognitivists and noncognitivists, and it provides a brief outline of the history of twentieth-century meta-ethical debate. The section begins with some passages from Hume's treatise concerning the respective roles of reason and emotion in ethics, it then covers several of the most important and influential positions in twentieth-century meta-ethics: Moore's intuitionist non-naturalism is represented by some passages from Principia in which he presents the Open Question Argument; Ayer's emotivism is represented by his defense of that position in Language, Truth, and Language; Hare's prescriptivism is presented in a short introductory to his views; and the naturalistic rejoinder to these meta-ethical views is represented by some work of Geoffrey Warnock.

The section on the realism/anti-realism debate is centered on contemporary work. This section doesn't include anything from contemporary defenders of noncognitivism; instead, it is set up as a debate between cognitivists who defend realism and those who defend anti-realism. This section includes classic anti-realist arguments from Mackie, Harman, and Williams along with responses to each of their arguments, and it concludes with the final chapter from Smith's The Moral Problem.

The book's coverage of issues concerning morality that aren't part of the areas discussed above is somewhat less consistent. (This is no doubt due, at least in part, to an attempt to cover quite a bit in a limited amount of space.) Other issues covered include the relation between morality and self-interest, the relation between morality and religion, freedom of the will, feministic ethics, and sociobiology. None of these issues is covered as extensively as any of the issues mentioned above, and the coverage of some of them consists of only a couple of papers. Still, the papers included do allow one to get some sense of the issues in these areas.

The book also includes some not very extensive historical coverage. Pojman has included something from several of the historical figures who are considered absolute essential in philosophical study of ethics. So you've got your Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Hume, Kant, and Mill. (It is worth noting that, where translations are necessary, the translations are mostly older ones, like Jowett's translations of Plato's Crito, Euthyphro, and The Republic; Ross's translation of Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics; and Paton's translation of Kant's Groundwork.) The book attempts to integrate these historical figures into its discussion of particular subjects, and it does so by treating the works of these figures as introductions to the issues. Consequently, the first reading in most of the book's sections is from a historically important philosopher. Mill gets the first word on utilitarianism; Hobbes on egoism; Aristotle on virtue ethics; etc. There's enough historical coverage here to give people a flavor of the major figures' views, but this book certainly isn't intended an anthology for a course in the history of ethics. In fact, nearly all the readings come from twentieth century figures.

If there is a noteworthy problem with this anthology, it's that some of its sections are rather superficial. In particular, the section on relativism and the section on the relation between morality and religion are underdeveloped. Both of these are shorter sections, and some of the the papers in these sections simply aren't very good philosophy. Those looking to understand the debates in these areas will probably have to look to other readings on these topics. In addition, the section on egoism is pretty small--though the individual papers in that section are all good.

These relatively minor worries shouldn't dissuade people from using this book, however, as its coverage in all other areas is more than adequate. The book is well-suited for use in survey courses in ethics that are aimed at undergraduate students, especially if one intends to cover issues in both normative ethics and meta-ethics.