Morality Without God? (Philosophy in Action) and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
Qty:1
  • List Price: $15.95
  • Save: $2.34 (15%)
FREE Shipping on orders over $35.
In Stock.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
Gift-wrap available.
Add to Cart
FREE Shipping on orders over $35.
Used: Very Good | Details
Sold by ShopNBS
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comment: Minor amounts of wear to the edges and corners of book cover. Otherwise in excellent shape with tight binding and clean, unmarked pages.
Add to Cart
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See all 2 images

Morality Without God? (Philosophy in Action) Paperback – December 1, 2011


See all 3 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Kindle
"Please retry"
Paperback
"Please retry"
$13.61
$9.12 $7.51


Frequently Bought Together

Morality Without God? (Philosophy in Action) + The Four Loves
Price for both: $22.80

Buy the selected items together
  • The Four Loves $9.19

NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Image
Looking for the Audiobook Edition?
Tell us that you'd like this title to be produced as an audiobook, and we'll alert our colleagues at Audible.com. If you are the author or rights holder, let Audible help you produce the audiobook: Learn more at ACX.com.

Product Details

  • Series: Philosophy in Action
  • Paperback: 192 pages
  • Publisher: Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (December 1, 2011)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0199841357
  • ISBN-13: 978-0199841356
  • Product Dimensions: 5 x 7 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
  • Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #917,614 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

With a conversational and commonsensical tone, Sinnott-Armstrong defends nonbelief from accusations of immorality, both at the individual and the societal level by considering surveys and statistics on homicide, discrimination and charity, among other categories. He establishes a moral framework rooted in avoiding harm—opposed to a theistic morality whereby questions of right and wrong are decided by God's divine command, a moral account he derides for its inability to provide an independent moral standard. In his call for sincere dialogue with theists, Sinnott-Armstrong provides a welcome relief from the apoplectic excesses of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, while also addressing objections to homosexuality and evolution frequently raised by evangelical Christians. Nonetheless, the oft-stated modesty of his aim to show merely that atheists and agnostics can be moral, coupled with a loose and ill-defined notion of harm, leaves the reader with an account of morality that coheres with the universal disapprobation of such horrors as murder and rape, but provides little demonstration of its applicability to the grayer areas of moral conundrums. (July 10
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Review

"In his call for sincere dialogue with theists, Sinnott-Armstrong provides a welcome relief from the apoplectic excesses of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, while also addressing objections to homosexuality and evolution frequently raised by evangelical Christians." --IPublishers Weekly

"[I]t is accessible and lively, my hope is that it will be widely read, especially by theists." --Peter Lamal, The Humanist

"... the clarity of this text successfully defuses many erroneous claims about religion and morality, both popular and academic; this volume certainly deserves a wide audience in this increasingly secular and skeptical world." --Choice

"Morality Without God? is an engaging, pithy book arguing against the necessity of God and religion for a robust morality. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong has distinguished himself as a leading philosopher in his work on metaethics and moral psychology, as well as books on moral and epistemological skepticism, and in Morality Without God? he commendably succeeds in writing a philosophically respectable introduction to the problems facing religious morality suitable for virtually any audience." --Philosophia Christi

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

4.0 out of 5 stars
5 star
4
4 star
2
3 star
0
2 star
2
1 star
0
See all 8 customer reviews
Every religious person who's prejudiced against atheists needs to read this book.
J. Davis
While Professor Sinnott-Armstrong may disagree with the arguments of the book, he would actually have to argue that the book DOES rely solely on religious arguments.
Bobby Bambino
Overall, the book is a well written (in a lay and accessible way), successful piece of good philosophy.
Hamilton Carvalho

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

24 of 27 people found the following review helpful By Bobby Bambino on July 9, 2009
Format: Hardcover Verified Purchase
First, let me say that I am a practicing Catholic, very committed to my faith. However, this book is very well written, fair, balanced, and honest. Never does Professor Sinnott-Armstrong use ad hominum attacks, make wild assertions, or neglect to show care and concern for theists. I felt nothing but love for his fellow theists while reading this book. This does not, however, mean that Professor Sinnott-Armstrong compromises his position.Of course, there are still arguments that the author makes which I disagree with, but I think Professor Sinnott-Armstrong is a much needed addition (or voice, I suppose) to the growing body of intelligent, kind, and rational atheists (including John Lofton and David Ramsey Steele among others) not driven by malice, unlike the new atheists (yes, I have an axe to grind with the new atheism).

The goal of this book is basically to show that atheists can be and are moral. In fact, the last sentence of the preface states "[My main goal] is only to show that atheists need not be arbitrary, unreasonable, ignorant, inconsistent, irresponsible, disreputable, uncaring, or, especially, immoral." I completely agree with Professor Sinnott-Armstrong's thesis as he states it here. In fact, at the end of the first chapter, Professor Sinnott-Armstrong lists 5 main claims that he discusses in detail throughout the book. I agree with his beliefs about the truths of all 5 claims except the third one. I think the most accurate way to state my main disagreement with Professor Sinnott-Armstrong is to say that I believe that objective morality has no firm foundation without God. He does tries to show that the atheist does indeed have a firm foundation for morality apart from God in one of the chapters, which I will discuss a little bit below.
Read more ›
5 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Format: Hardcover
It has been assumed in most societies since the dawn of history that humans cannot be moral without God and religion. Sinnott-Armstrong, who is a Professor of Philosophy and Legal Studies at Dartmouth College, presents in this extended essay the modern view to the contrary.

More specifically he argues that a belief in God is not necessary for people to be good or for humans to realize that some acts are morally wrong. We do not need the fear of eternal damnation to behave in morally acceptable ways. This is then a treatise in moral philosophy in which Sinnott-Armstrong takes the side of atheists and agnostics against theists who think that being atheist or agnostic means per force that you are immoral.

He begins with the provocative question in Chapter One "Would You Marry an Atheist?" The answer is most people wouldn't. Furthermore, the prejudice against atheists and other non-believers is so great that an avowed atheist has no chance of being elected to high office in the United States. He notes that people in general fear atheists and discriminate against them simply because they are atheists, and that fear stems from the mistaken idea that atheists can't be moral. In the chapters that follow Sinnott-Armstrong argues with some force that religious people and theists in general may be more morally compromised than atheists. He cites studies that suggest as much.

Personally my experience with fundamentalist Christians and others who take the Bible literally is that their mental states are so compromised by the conflicting morality of the Bible that they practice a similar duplicity in their daily lives. If you've ever argued with a creationist you know what I mean. But Christians are not alone in their prejudices against non-believers.
Read more ›
10 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
9 of 12 people found the following review helpful By Amazon Customer VINE VOICE on March 6, 2012
Format: Paperback
Reading this is is very similar in tone to "50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God" by Guy P. Harrison in that the author is overly nice to the religious in an effort to demonstrate that atheists/agnostics are just as moral (more moral in some areas, less moral in others) than theists. This book is also similar in tone to "Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe" by Greg Epstein in that both these books suggest that the New Atheists are too harsh. So, consequently, after insulting them, he tries to befriend the Christian and meet in the middle.

One of the main problems I see with this book is I hardly meet any Christians who think that atheists cannot be moral. He seems to be erecting a straw man and then knocking it down. Sure, *some* fundamental Christians may argue this or you may always find this in theology books but in my experience the argument I often hear is not that atheists cannot be moral but if we are to answer the Christians on their ground, the question they ask is "why be moral" since they claim we have no objective basis for our morality.

True, this book finally reaches some answer in chapter 4, which was good, but it takes us down paths that are highly unnecessary and distracting. For example, chapter three goes over some studies that have been conducted between believers and non-believers and after each study the author concludes that this doesn't really prove anything. Then why show us? Why take us down this path? If the whole chapter is inconclusive then don't waste our time with speculation, which in many instances seem to suggest that Christians are in fact more likely to give or be more charitable, while the non-believer is more likely to be less bigoted and judgmental.
Read more ›
2 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again

Customer Images


What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?