Customer Reviews

A Refutation of Moral Relativism: Interviews with an Absolutist

5 star:		(19)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

Professor `Isa Ben Adam (nice name in translation), a Palestinian Arab scholar and Absolutist, is interviewed (and debated) by Moral Relativist Libby Rawls, a black journalist and former wife, psychological social worker, surfing instructor, actress, alcoholic, and PI. What a marvellous debate ensues as Libby throws every relativist argument at the learned prof, only to have them roundly and soundly demolished! This easy non-academic read is a useful guide for those engaged in dinner-table debates on this most crucial of issues. Obviously born from years of experience as an embattled Absolutist in American adademia, this Kreeft work is a delight to read as it sets out the arguments for and agin. As everyone who's ever debated this subject knows, it's very hard to avoid ad hominems and other flesh-cutting retreats from reason, and they're here just as in real life. Another step towards the Restoration of Metaphysics. This is the book you'll want your Relativist friends to read (but which they'll probably ignore because refutation has too many implications for their personal lives). Get it.

Peter Kreeft is a quite enthusiastic Catholic apologist. This book is an imaginary dialogue, in which the existence of moral absolutes is emphatically affirmed, and relativism and relativists are cast into outer darkness. Kreeft does not have the epigrammatic gift like his great predecessor G. K. Chesterton did. In fact, GKC summed up much of this book's argument in a single quip: "One can no more have a private religion than one can have a private sun or a private moon." But Kreeft accurately spots and calls to account much lazy thinking that's out there. For instance, if all values are "culturally determined", what are we to make of people whose values impel them to resist and denounce their own culture? Plus, he is quite funny in places, and sympathetic readers will enjoy the protagonist's zest in making his arguments. Throughout, Kreeft--through the fictional mouth of 'Isa the absolutist--insists on the primacy of people's experiences and reactions over any philosophical system, and of the pre-existence of a discoverable Truth. This book settles nothing, as such things can never be settled. But it _is_ a big morale booster to Christians who may be becoming fatigued under the amoral onslaught of our culture nowadays. It is a puff of a refreshing breeze, heartening us to say "Here I stand, I can do no other." Even if you are Catholic! :)

Wow. I just finished reading Peter Kreeft's "A Refutation of Moral Relativism." I couldn't imagine a more thought-provoking, eye-opening, and genuinely meaningful book.

Kreeft, a professor of philosophy at Boston College, examines the definition, history, and importance of moral relativism. He makes an impeccable case that the current controversy over the nature of morality -- that is, whether it be relative or absolute -- is THE most crucial debate of our time.

The book opened my eyes to a whole new way of thinking about Western culture. We are so conditioned to believe that morality is relative that such conditioning affects our thinking, our language and diction, our schooling, our media, and (obviously) our morality -- our very way of life (and thus, maybe, our afterlife?). Kreeft makes the case that, with so much at stake, we cannot afford to be wrong.

A master logician and philosopher, Kreeft takes on the arguments for moral relativism one by one. His refutation is devastating; he demonstrates that most arguments for relativism are logically self-contradictory and, indeed, that morality cannot be anything other than absolute either in theory or in practice. (He even shows that tolerance--often an explicit reason for belief in relativism--is a virtue only achieved through moral absolutism.)

Afterwards, Kreeft turns his exacting lens on absolutism, its assumptions and its role in reality. He is, if nothing else, supremely objective and fair-minded.

But don't let the thought of reading about logic and philosophy turn you off! Professor Kreeft as much for the average reader as he does for anyone else. His writing is accesible, reasonable (in the most literal sense of that word), and, above all, ENJOYABLE. As his subtitle indicates, the book is in the form of several interviews, or debates, between a moral absolutist, 'Isa, and a moral relativist, Libby.

"A Refutation of Moral Relativism" should be required reading in all philosophy courses dealing with morality. It is perhaps one of the most underappreciated books ever published. Professor Kreeft's message is so profoundly deep and meaningful that it can change the course of Western culture. Don't go another day without reading this book!

Back in December of 1999, I ended up in the E.R. with some weird infection on my face. While waiting to be seen, I read almost the entirety of this book OUT LOUD to my husband (first in the waiting salon, then while lying inside the examinaiton room). We got some odd looks, but it's a great way to pass an unpleasant time. There's humor, there's anger, there's exasperation, there's head-butting, and there are some good points made. Kreeft merely moderates. If you want to enjoy the marvelous intelligence of Mr. Kreeft, see his other philosophical selections. I have almost all his books, and he's delightful. He makes philosophy and biblical doctrine highly accessbible. *Mir*

This little book, the plot and premise of which you can read elsewhere, is a terrific introduction to the concept of moral relativism versus absolutism for anyone who wondered if you could be a firm believer in right and wrong, good and evil, and still be a nice person. (Answer: you really can't do it any other way.) But what's more, it is a great intro for a young person to the joys and stimulations of the greatest game there is in the world, the fierce but loving logical argument among friends. "Why do you believe that to be true?" is something many young people never ask their friends these days, and deep thinking and friendly argument supporting or attacking various positions has been supplanted with more popular entertainments. But if you know a young person, or an old one, who needs a good lesson in how to argue and debate, how to open their mind up and wrap it around a subject and take it apart and put it back together again, I can't think of a better intro off hand. Bravo, Dr. Kreeft.

Fantastic book, a tough read for those unwilling to give truth a chance; like a good philosopher, Dr. Kreeft makes you think. This book will challenge your relativism and help you see that absolutes are not a thing of the past! Great read if your willing to take an honest look at your moral disposition. Perhaps it will change you, perhaps it will not. Reward yourself, approach this book with an open mind. Don't pay attention to the critic who wrote the review: "One-sided and poorly written". Read the book and decide for yourself. This person reminds me of Plato's cave- once confronted by light all he can do is recoil from it. Don't simply claim that the book is one-sided and poorly written, prove it, refute the ideas in the work. It is very easy to dismiss, but not so to refute! If your looking for an author that will challenge you with ideas in a clear, brilliant, and easy to read style, Dr. Kreeft is for you. His style embodies the phrase: "If you can't say it simply, then you don't know it"- Dr. Kreeft knows his stuff! He introduces very complex ideas in simple terms- how many philosophers do you know who do that!

For me, this book is very tough to review. It's approach is unique, and this tends to impact how the subject matter is addressed. I think the uniqueness of its approach had great potential, but ultimately, I found that it was this unique approach that kept the book from getting over the hump.

The book represents a fictional dialogue between a moral absolutist and a moral relativist. The book contains a series of fictional interviews where each side presents their own case, while attempting to refute the other's case. If done right, this is a very vibrant and intriguing approach to dealing with a highly charged subject. But in order to do this right, one must adequately and fairly represent the views of each side, in order to avoid strawmen and incompleteness. And it is here where I thought the book did not totally succeed.

There are a few sections of the book that are super. I felt that the best chapters, by far, were the ones where the fictional relativist makes her case for relativism, and then watching the fictional absolutist dismantle each positive assertion for relativism. I felt that this section was very fair to the relativist view, and that the positive assertions offered for relativism are indeed commonplace assertions that accurately reflect the thinking of many relativists. As indicated previously, the integrity of the book rests almost entirely on presenting an accurate and adequate picture of each side of the debate. In this particular section, Kreeft succeeds and I felt that this section alone makes the book good enough to read.

However, I personally found much of the remaining material to be both mediocre, distracted, and confused, thus the 3 star rating I've given the book. I found Kreeft's extended arguments for experience as a proof of absolutism to be weak and on shaky ground philosophically. I think that it does make sense to appeal to 'experience' as an argument for moral absolutism, but this must be done very carefully. I felt that Kreeft did not adequately sharpen his experience argument in such a way as to make it a concise proof for absolutism.

In regards to the 'distracting' concept identified above, I felt there was simply too much needless banter from both sides of the fictional debate that served no useful end. I'm aware that some readers may view the ad hominems from both sides as being entertaining, but I found it to be very distracting and disrupting to the flow of the book. The ad hominems emanating from both sides could have served a useful purpose had these ad hominems themselves been refuted. But many were not, and appeared to have been inserted into the fictional dialogue for entertainment value, rather than as legitimate points for debate and refutation.

Lastly, I felt the book was confused about what it was trying to do. The dialogue at times delves into philosophical theory, both past and present, but also clearly delves into layman arguments as well. As a result, I felt as if the book couldn't make up its mind as to whether the emphasis was going to be on debating philosophical concepts, or down to earth opinions of everyday people. It tries to dabble in both, but I found the result to be an inadequate examination of both. I think Kreeft should have clearly decided at the outset who he was trying to talk to here - a philosophically and logically oriented group, or a layman opinion-based group. The issue of moral relativism is one where significant and lengthy treatises could be written to either audience. But in this book, Kreeft writes a very short book that tries to reach both, and I think this confused the analysis and examination and shortchanged both sides.

In summary, a number of chapters were quite good. But for the reasons outlined above, I thought that the book could have been much better, and thus represents only a partial success.

Peter Kreeft is absolutely brilliant. This book does alot to point out what is wrong with our culture. Many today justify their actions with the excuse, "What's right for me isn't necesarrily right for you." This book puts an end to this mindless blabber. Buy it. Read it. Re-read it. Recommend it to a loved one.

My first sample of this writer's exposition, and I am an avowed "fan". Actually got this book from my local library, read it a bunch of times, referred to it frequently in debates with confreres interested in the "essential questions", and decided I needed it on my shelves permanently.

Truly imaginative, as the characters involved in this rigorous and sometimes sensitive debate are all in Prof. Kreeft's mind. They come alive, though, because the "types" they so ably represent are clear reflections of people you and I all know - especially those who just don't recognize that their arguments fail the most basic logic tests.

For example, as I write this (Spring, 2003), a murder case in California charges that the alleged killer has taken two lives - one, his wife, and another, their unborn child. California has decided to pursue both deaths as murders, thereby making it possible to seek the ultimate sanction on the alleged killer - the death penalty.

Meanwhile (and it is hard to believe these legal decisions are taking place in the same country), the legal system of the state of Connecticut has determined that an unborn child is not functionally different from other body parts - teeth, hair, skin, etc. - and therefore does not qualify as a person within the context of the law, so the judges ruled that there is no case to bring against a man who was being charged with attempted murder of an unborn child.

Only a moral relativist can successfully hold these two contradictory positions without conflict: either the fetus/unborn child is a human being/person and therefore covered by the protections of the law, or it isn't, in which case, a person cannot be charged with a crime for killing it.

Perhaps we can encourage our judges to read this work and straighten out this mess they've made. Well, we can dream, anyway ...

One of the best modern Catholic authors writes another great book. Kreeft's style is unique to most reader's not introduced to the Socratic method of dialogue. In easier to understand language, it means that the book is written more like a play than prose. Kreeft has two main characters, a Muslim absolutist and a liberal African American woman. The two debate, discuss and dialogue about all aspects of morality. Kreeft, as usual, is easy to read and yet remains challenging in his intellectual mastery of the subject. Kreeft makes difficult ideas seem easy and absolutely destroys every single argument in support of relativism used today.

If you want to understand how modern man thinks and why he is so wrong in his thought-process, then this book is perfect.