...
Show More
Did not finish. Boring.
Ease Reading-Find Your Next Favorite Book
Morality
...
Show More
Bernard Williams's remarkable essay on morality confronts the problems of writing moral philosophy, and offers a stimulating alternative to more systematic accounts that seem nevertheless to have left all the important issues somewhere off the page. Williams explains, analyzes and distinguishes a number of key positions, from the purely amoral to notions of subjective or relative morality, testing their coherence before going on to explore the nature of "goodness" in relation to responsibilities and choice, roles, standards, and human nature.
120 pages, Paperback
First published January 1,1972
This edition
- Format
-
120 pages, Paperback
- Published
-
July 30, 1993 by Cambridge University Press
- ISBN
-
9780521457293
- ASIN
-
0521457297
- Language
-
English
About the author
...
Show More
Sir Bernard Arthur Owen Williams was an English moral philosopher. His publications include Problems of the Self (1973), Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (1985), Shame and Necessity (1993), and Truth and Truthfulness (2002). He was knighted in 1999.
As Knightbridge Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge and Deutsch Professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Williams became known for his efforts to reorient the study of moral philosophy to psychology, history, and in particular to the Greeks. Described by Colin McGinn as an "analytical philosopher with the soul of a general humanist," he was sceptical about attempts to create a foundation for moral philosophy. Martha Nussbaum wrote that he demanded of philosophy that it "come to terms with, and contain, the difficulty and complexity of human life."
Williams was a strong supporter of women in academia; according to Nussbaum, he was "as close to being a feminist as a powerful man of his generation could be." He was also famously sharp in conversation. Gilbert Ryle, one of Williams's mentors at Oxford, said that he "understands what you're going to say better than you understand it yourself, and sees all the possible objections to it, and all the possible answers to all the possible objections, before you've got to the end of your own sentence."
As Knightbridge Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge and Deutsch Professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Williams became known for his efforts to reorient the study of moral philosophy to psychology, history, and in particular to the Greeks. Described by Colin McGinn as an "analytical philosopher with the soul of a general humanist," he was sceptical about attempts to create a foundation for moral philosophy. Martha Nussbaum wrote that he demanded of philosophy that it "come to terms with, and contain, the difficulty and complexity of human life."
Williams was a strong supporter of women in academia; according to Nussbaum, he was "as close to being a feminist as a powerful man of his generation could be." He was also famously sharp in conversation. Gilbert Ryle, one of Williams's mentors at Oxford, said that he "understands what you're going to say better than you understand it yourself, and sees all the possible objections to it, and all the possible answers to all the possible objections, before you've got to the end of your own sentence."
Readers also enjoyed
Community Reviews
Rating(3.9 / 5.0, 33 votes)
5 stars
9(27%)
4 stars
12(36%)
3 stars
12(36%)
2 stars
0(0%)
1 stars
0(0%)
33 reviews All reviews
...
Show More
An excellent book as a critique of modern moral philosophy, which is truly an untenable mess. I wouldn't recommend using as a positive basis for your own thought. Anscombe would be good for that. But this best demonstrates the foolishness of trying to speak of morals without a concept of Divine law and theology to support it; without, the best you can do is ethics.
...
Show More
While I may try to finish this, I will probably have forgotten most of it by then. I may just be lazy, but I really am not following very well. The main gist of the argument is quite simple, and Williams has some very strong views which is very apparent ("... relativism, the anthropologist's heresy, possibly the most absurd view to have been advanced even in moral philosophy." p34). I think my main problem is that I'm still not sure what his definition of morality is, and therefore all his arguments about why something, such as a belief, shows a particular moral view don't really make sense. Of course, I may have just missed this, but am at the moment far too lazy to look for it.
...
Show More
Not exactly an introduction since it dives into very technical language immediately, but it is nevertheless a good primer for people who are already versed in some moral philosophy to understand its broad currents from the 1960s and 70s. He is critical of the excessive abstraction and technicality of analytic moral philosophy which was then contemporary, divorced as he thought it was from real-world examples. This habit has unfortunately continued into the 2020s despite Williams's criticism. Williams does distinguish between metaethics and normative ethics but treats them in conjunction, presenting major problems with moral relativism and moral subjectivisim, as well as utilitarianism. It's a decent book which helped connect some of the earlier metaethics done by Moore and Ayer in the earlier 20th century with later currents of ethical thought - in particular it contains an influential indictment of moral relativism that would influence Martha Nussbaum's opposition to moral relativism in the disputes between feminists and multiculturalists in the 1990s. It doesn't carry any major ideas since it is mainly a book for clarification and refutation. Overall it's a useful response to some key issues of his day, but if you want to understand debates about the ontology of morality there are better places to look than this book, it serving now really only as a historical curiosity.
...
Show More
This is an excellent undergraduate-level introduction to moral thought for two reasons.
First, it is short. At 97 pages, this book can be covered in less than a day.
Second, although some of Williams' own views are discussed, this essay is a lucid, easy to read survey of the major modes of ethical thinking - from amoralist to utilitarian.
If you want to know more about moral philosophy but are not sure where to begin, try here.
(But please note, this is a scholarly essay by one of the greatest minds in 20th Century philosophy. I can't help but think some of the negative reviews were due to folks expecting it would be the History Channel version.)
First, it is short. At 97 pages, this book can be covered in less than a day.
Second, although some of Williams' own views are discussed, this essay is a lucid, easy to read survey of the major modes of ethical thinking - from amoralist to utilitarian.
If you want to know more about moral philosophy but are not sure where to begin, try here.
(But please note, this is a scholarly essay by one of the greatest minds in 20th Century philosophy. I can't help but think some of the negative reviews were due to folks expecting it would be the History Channel version.)
...
Show More
A good short book on morality. The last chapter on utilitarianism was for me the most interesting. The four outlooks of utilitarianism include first it is non- transcendental, and makes no appeal outside human life, in particular disregarding religious considerations. Second, its basic good happiness is minimally problematic as everyone wants to be happy. Thirdly, moral issues theoretically can be determined by empirical calculations. Lastly, utilitarianism provides a common currency of moral thought. However, different cultures and societies may differ on what they consider happiness resulting in conflict. The problem with utilitarianism is that morality is more than just happiness.
...
Show More
I will just copypaste my personal summary of the book below, made as I read through for easier recall. As a summary of moral concepts, it is frustratingly dense but thankfully short. Williams spends a lot of time saying little, yet manages to condense a good deal of moral philosophy into this book. Nevertheless, a taxing read. 2/5 based on the Goodreads guidelines of "it's ok".
Please feel free to point out if I misunderstood Williams - very likely -.-
coming soon
Please feel free to point out if I misunderstood Williams - very likely -.-
coming soon
...
Show More
Refreshing and full of insight.
Leave a Review