| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Trade In this Item for up to £0.25
Get an extra £5 when you trade in books worth £10 or more until June 30, 2012. Trade in Wickedness: A Philosophical Essay (Routledge Classics) for an Amazon.co.uk gift card of up to £0.25, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Find more products eligible for trade-in.
|
Frequently Bought Together
Product details
|
More About the Author
Product Description
Review
Product Description
This book is about the problem of evil, but not quite in the traditional sense, since I see it as our problem, not God's. Read the first page
Concordance
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Midgely brings significant literary talent to bare on the topic of moral philosophy, considering and condensing a wide range of sources which have attempted to provide objective accounts of wickedness and evil in human nature. There is an introduction by Midgely which considers how well it has aged and developments since the time of writing.
There is a great contents and index too, allowing anyone pressed for time reading it in the course of their studies to cut to the passages which interest them, for instance consideration of Freud and Lorenz.
This is definitely a book I can recommend to any reader, academic or generally interested reader, it is more accessible for the general reader than either Heart and Mind or Evolution as a Religion also in the Routledge Classics range. This read will prove interesting to anyone who muses about human nature.
Midgley recognises the difficulties in creating a universally applicable 'moral code' that could make clear what acts are moral and which are immoral. Instead of constructing a code of ethics, she takes the view that evil is essentially a failure of responsibility to others, the world or perhaps even oneself. For example, anti-semitism is evil, for its failure to treat responsibily those it negates, Jewish people.
Her dealings with aggression are very well thought through. She draws heavily from ethology (in particular the work of Konrad Lorenz) in giving a clearer understanding of what aggression is and that it is not the same as evil. She also debunks the Freudian concept of the 'death-drive' convincingly.
Perhaps the most important thing I have learnt from Midgley is the inadequacy of a prevailing view of 'determinism', which sees it as the same as 'fatalism'(acts are performed through us, rather than by us, we have no agency). Determinism is so often treated as an alternative to making choices, rather than its pre-condition. The idea that, for example, I am determined by prior causes external to me to choose a coffee when I go to starbucks does not make it any less my decision. It is just the recognition that 'I' am not an independent island unto myself (as thinkers such as Satre held). Determinism doesn't prevent hostile prejudices such as anti-semitism or violent acts of abuse being wicked. Our interconnectedness with the world is a reason for seeing wickedness as a failure to live in harmony with our world as best we can. Our decisions do have an effect, just as much as they have roots in our surrounding social and physical environment.
To summarise, Midgley is a superb writer, extremely thought-provoking and highly rewarding. This is one of her most engaging books.
"She's a moral philosopher."
"Isn't moral philosophy dead?"
"Obviously you've not read the book yet."
In my unhumble opinion, Mary Midgley has done us a great service by being one of the few to write great books on moral philosophy (others include Philippa Foote, Alistaire McIntyre and Owen Flanagan).
Actually, this book couldn't have come at a better time. Ever since the "war on terror" - as with most morally difficult times - we are quick to condemn bad acts, using the word evil not so much as a label but as a dismissal. Rarely do we a.) face up to the fact that evil tendencies seem inherent and b.) after having done that, be honest enough with ourselves to introspect on what exactly evil "is".
MIdgley is an astute introspecter and goes through many arguments that she disagrees with and gives us just as many that she finds satisfying. First, and this is the subtracted star, though, she tells us that our examination of evil as a positive trait (as opposed to the abscence of one) is misguided. The first chapter is spend by in large walking us through why she feels it easier to examine evil as more a degree of abscence of goodness, than as a positive trait unto itself. This I find entirely unconvincing. Not that I think it is a positive trait, just that I'm not sure why it is either. Introspection doesn't seem to tell us.
What is entirely welcome - and this accounts for the four stars - is that her discussion never strays from discussing evil as a natural part of us, rather than dismissing it as either something that we learn via a blank slate effect, or something that only some of us really have. Yes, we've come a long way from Rousseau's natural man and Locke's tabula rasa.
More or less, the book focuses, as apropos of Midgley, on the seemingly endless conflict and irreducibility of the human predicament. We are animals. We are moral. We are self serving. We are altruistic. We are sympathetic. We are ruthless. We are NOT formulas. It's just amazing that philosophy took this long to figure it out.
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
