Customer Reviews

Conscience and the Common Good: Reclaiming the Space Between Person and State

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Mr. Vischer gives a thorough and refreshingly non-partisan treatment of issues related to conscience. His illuminating discussion of conscience's "relational dimension" steers the discussion of rights clear of the typical hyper-individualism of Americans. Rather, he shows that individual rights can be protected more effectively when we view the human person not as an island but a social creature, who naturally forms associations to make his voice heard in the conversation between citizens and the State.

Vischer writes on a topic that is much needed to properly define who we are and who we want to be. There needs to be a greater understanding of personal responsibility in society both here and around the globe.

Prof. Vischer is one of the most thoughtful commentators working in English today on the intersection of religion and society. This book cements his pre-eminent position in the legal academy, and is a must-read for all who care about these issues.

Since the market crash, sales of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged have gone through the roof. It's time for a 21st century exploration of the line between the individual and the state, and Vischer's book could not be more topical. A must read.

Surely one of the interesting stories for historians to investigate some day will be how in a time when gay rights were making headway everywhere, except in places like Uganda, some of the oldest university presses in the world were trying publish basically anti-gay pulp academic fodder. The why and wherefore of it somebody will ultimately know, but I bet the names of rich anti-gay business men will be involved. The types of people who think Roger Scruton is a sage. How else can one possibly explain a book like this? It is truly one of the most childish attempts at covering one's true intentions I have ever seen. You could sum up the whole thing by saying: it is OK to discriminate if you and a few others share the desire to discriminate. You just need to call conscience "relational". Naturally, a lot of talk about "intersubjectivity" and "relational" this and that is brought in to bolster the case that starts the book. A pair of photographers who dislike gay rights so much that they cannot even snap a photo of a gay wedding! This is what Cambridge University is publishing?? There must be a monied reason behind it. For by the time you reach this poor fellow's "Conclusion", and he pulls his bedraggled rabbit- out -of- his- hat, saying, -- you guessed it-- it is basically OK to discriminate if we consider conscience a relational matter, you feel you have been surreptitiously prepared for lobotomy. What is even worse is that the author Vischer is not content with such ramshackle conclusions. He must philosophize on it. He says that if the state is allowed to impose the good, then it will control all conversations about it. First, I love the very "with-it" insertion of the idea that it is all about ultimately having conversations about this and that. And of course guaranteeing other people equal treatment is supposed to be a conversation stopper. Well, no, it is just guaranteeing equal treatment. You are free to have whatever conversation you want about it, e.g. that you don't like providing equal treatment, that the people receiving equal treatment are not worthy, or that you are going to write a very weak-tea book trying to justify your unlovely view. In light of this, I defy any reasonably intelligent person to read the "conclusion" of this book and not just laugh at the conceptual doll-house that is conjured. Hardly a real world of rights strongly won, but a toy world of little little dollhouse "relations" that allow at least the author to think he has made potential discrimination anything other than discrimination. Mark my words, this book will, twenty years from now, be considered one of the most embarrassing bits of puffery from an academic outlet. Only outdone by Robert George's efforts.