The key to understanding Holloway's approach can be summed up by saying: the book is a rational and humane attempt to get away from the "and God said" kind of morality (divine command model). Holloway sets the scene for this by asking, "Do we have to be religious to be moral? Do we have to believe in God to be good?" Of course, the answer to both these questions is "no". But how he addresses them is the interesting part.
His thesis is that there are many contemporary moral dilemmas, which are not about right or wrong; but rather they bear witness to the existence of competing values or rival value systems. Subsequently, he argues for a "middle way". Above all else, Holloway has confidence in "the dynamic nature of humanity" to address these dilemmas. As the worldview, which previously underlined divine command models of ethical decision making, has little authority for people outside the church (as well as many others inside it). The divine command models were more concerned about sin and obedience, than resolving complex moral issues. He recognizes that all this contributes to "ethical confusion". To address these dilemmas constructively, a new kind of wisdom is required. This wisdom is the basis of a "non-religious ethic". This is a good book, which tackles bravely conventional approaches to ethical issues.