Customer Reviews

Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air

5 star:		(31)
4 star:		(12)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

When you keep in mind the purpose of this book -- a practical guide to arm Moral Objectivists against three types of Moral Relativism (cultural/descriptive, socially prescriptive, and individual/ethical relativism) -- it does a pretty good job. Not everyone does Philosophy, yet who doesn't encounter relativist arguments in almost every facet of life. Dealing mainly with Moral Relativism (only touching on Epistemological and Ontological Relativism), Beckwith and Koukl's book helps to make sense of what's really at issue, using concrete examples and crisp refutations. Many readers will find utility in Chapter 7, "Relativism's Seven Fatal Flaws" (a covenantal coincidence in the sevens?) and Chapter 14, "Tactics to Refute Relativism". Some of their arguments could have been fleshed out a little more. Also, a chapter on the Rise of Relativism outlining the influence of key figures past and present would have been useful to many. All in all, an easy-to-read and satisfying work that many non-relativists will find very useful in upper high school and junior college, as well as at dinner table debates. Of course, convinced relativists won't read this book, but it will help to clarify things for those who haven't thought much about these things. Another boost for those out to Save Civilsation.

So often in the past I have found myself powerless to communicate why another person's assertions made little or no sense -- sometimes I couldn't even put my finger on why their statements were wrong -- but this book has shown me how to spot the numerous errors inherent in moral relativism and contend for truth, or at least, get the other person thinking about his or her beliefs. A 'must read' for every thinking person. I can't wait to see what Mr. Beckwith and Mr. Koukl will teach us next!

This book impressed me. Some of the other reviews give the impression that the book is very shallow or is not substantive. I disagree. The book accomplishes its task admirably. The authors seek to show that moral relativism is false, the consequences of moral relativism and that moral objectivism is true. I note that the author is indebted to the book Principia Ethica by G.E. Moore for some of his ideas.

Definitions:

moral relativism: "The view that when it comes to moral issues there are no universal objective right or wrong answers, no inappropriate or appropriate judgments, and no reasonable or rational ways by which to make distinctions that apply in every time, in every place and to every person." (page 12-13)

moral objectivism: The view that when it comes to moral issues, there ARE universal right or wrong answers, inappropriate or appropriate judgments, and reasonable or rational ways by which to make distinctions that apply in every time, in every place and to every person (this is a composite of the view point the author's offer and defend)

The authors argue that people know that there are morally objective rules by intuition. This may be misunderstood to be a whim or emotion. The author's give an example of another thing that is known by intuition: "My hand is injured," I say "How do you know it's injured?" you ask. "Because it hurts." "How do you know it hurts?" "Because I feel it." "But how do you know you feel it." "I just know..." (pages 57-58; please note the last line is a summary of the author's further explanation)

I think the author's provided a devastating critique of various different forms of relativism. The different forms they attacked were: Society Does Relativism (i.e. cultural or descriptive relativism), Society Says Relativism (i.e. conventionalism or normative ethical relativism), I Say Relativism (i.e. individual ethical relativism or ethical subjectivism). The terms in brackets are the formal philosophical names for these positions; the other terms are not technical but do aid in remembering the different types. To make an observation about the first type, it just means that different cultures basically disagree on morality (the authors change this idea itself as does C.S. Lewis in his book, The Abolition of Man.). However, however moral disagreement (if it is granted) does not lead one to the conclusion there are no moral rules. That would be like saying because people get math question like 2+2 wrong that there is no right answer.

The authors also describe the impact of relativism in public education (i.e. values clarification), law and on several controversial moral issues (i.e. abortion, same-sex marriage/homosexuality and euthanasia). On the last set of issues, it was interesting to learn that the permissibility of these actions in popular American culture essentially rests on two principles: absolute personal autonomy and ethical subjectivism. This means two things: (1) I am free to do *anything* I want and (2) Whatever I want and do is right. Is not immediately apparent that this has dangerous consequences? Another impact of relativism is that it negates all public debate on moral issues. Since there are no higher principles to appeal to, all morality basically reduces to might makes right (to put it into political parlance, what the Establishment enacts in law is moral). This view (relativism) would make protest for civil rights or protests against apartheid foolish and baseless.

Then there are the practical or tactical sections of the book; two chapters in particular stand out in this regard: Relativisms Seven Fatal Flaws and Tactics to Refute Relativism. These chapters alone are worth the price of the book. Indeed, they should be published separately in a small booklet.

I would highly recommend this book, especially for high school and college/University students. For teachers who say that you cant criticize the morality of another culture, impose your morality, or even, There is no absolute truth, and the like, here is how to deal with that viewpoint. The value of this book is in doing what Francis Schaeffer called, pre-evangelism, that is to say laying the groundwork for Christianity; making Christianity sensible and intellectually viable. Again, I fully recommend the book to all people yearning for clear thinking in morality.

The authors have done a great job in exposing the inconsistent nature of relativistic thinking. They point out that relativism has taken hold in a society (ours) that is unable to critically examine itself, and where self-interest and pleasure shape ethical decisions. Many relativists like to pass themselves off as tolerant and neutral folk (tolerant of everyone except those who hold an absolutist viewpoint, that is), but as Beckwith and Koukl point out, "the only place of true neutrality is silence". Throughout the book they explain the self-refuting nature of relativism; that is, it's merely absolutism in sheep's clothing. This book will be valuable for anyone looking to stand against the flood of subjectivism that currently rules the societal roost (mixed metaphors notwithstanding).

It was the late, great Francis Shaeffer who spoke of a group of people "who have both feet firmly planted in mid-air." This phrase brilliantly describes people in our society who adhere, as much as anyone can adhere to such a system, to moral relativism. For one can only be planted so firmly on a system that has no foundation. Relativism, written by Greg Koukl and Francis Beckwith, critiques moral relativism and explores the myriad inconsistencies inherent in this position.

The authors launch a five-pronged attack on relativism. In the first part they help the reader understand relativism and see the three different types: "society says," "society does" and "I say" relativism. In the second part they critique relativism, exposing seven of its most fatal flaws before turning in the third part to an exposure of the impact of relativism on education. In the fourth part they examine relativism in public policy, and specifically its application to homosexual marriage, abortion and euthenasia - three of the pressing issues of our time. The final part provides some tools to refute relativism.

The final part was the one I found most helpful. Having explained the background and dangers of relativism, the authors suggest some tactics that are helpful in arguing against relativism. First, they suggest showing the contradictions inherent in relativism, for in practice, this position is self-refuting. One effective tactic, then, is to show people that many of their positions depend on some type of absolute stance. They suggest the best way of dealing with the charge of "don't force your morality on me," is to simply ask "why not?" What gives him the right to impose his morality on you when you are not able to do the same to him? Second, they suggest pressing the person's hot button. Find that person's pet issue and relativize it to undermine his position. Third, force the tolerance issue. Force the person to examine why he cannot tolerate what he perceives as your intolerance. And fourth, have a ready defense. Know the issues and know the best ways to defend your position while casting doubts on the relativist's position.

While a book on this topic could easily become deeply philosophical and difficult to understand, Beckwith and Koukl do a good job of making it accessible. There are a few parts I had to read a few times to thoroughly understand them, but on the whole they write in such a way that they make their points clear without requiring extensive background in philosophy. Several points could have received more attention, but I understand the need to keep the book short enough to be attractive to a wide array of readers. In fact, my only real complaint with the book would be their use of the tiresome cliche of Adolf Hitler representing all that is evil in humans and Mother Teresa representing all that is good. The authors might plead that they use Mother Teresa only because people immediately understand what she represents, but I think it is time we stop using such a poor example of all that is virtuous. Koukl and Beckwith know better.

Relativism is a solid introduction to a topic with which we are all far too familiar simply because it pervades our society. Yet few positions do more to undermine the truth, the "true truth," of Scripture. It is critical that we have a ready defense of the absolutes that underly the truth of Christianity. This is not the type of book that is likely to change the minds of those who are already firmly-entrenched in their position, but neither is that the book's primary purpose. This book is a helpful tool to equip Christians in that which we know to be true.

This book is powerful because it begins with what scientists call first principles. First principles are the starting point where scientists begin to analyze new ideas or explain complex phenomena they have recently witnessed in the laboratory. The authors are not scientists, but philosophers, and perhaps without realizing it, they are using a similar approach.

This book is fundamental.

The book explains what has gone wrong with America in the last 50 years, but explains it with a high level discussion. High level means that the book takes a very general approach which can apply to many different problems or topics, and leaves out some details that are available in other works. Relativism is an abstract topic, but Beckwith and Koukl make it easy to understand.

If you are interested in political issues, social issues, IQ issues, racial issues or even education, this book will give you the foundation to understand some aspects of those topics that you will not see mentioned elsewhere, even in the well known books on these subjects.

The book is written by religious people, however most the discussion is not about religion. Read it and ignore the religious discussions if that subject does not interest you. It is still worth the time and effort as it contains a valuable message.

Relativism started with Kant and Hegel's ideas and has now permeated American society. It has gone unnoticed because it came thru the back door very slowly, a little at a time. This book will teach you to recognize it when it's about to slap you in the face.

I bought this book after hearing Greg Koukl speak at a conference. I was impressed with his arguments and character. As I read his book, I was further impressed by his and Dr. Beckwith's ability to easily articulate problems in relativism. By the time you finish reading the book you realize you can never say "I think they are wrong!" At most you will be able to say "I don't like that" or "I think they are right," but once you make some appeal to truth, you have already conceded to their view.

You can find many "scholarly" books on this subject, which most people who do not have PhD's in philosophy will not grasp. However, this book is not only understandable for upper-level high schoolers, but also deep enough in content to recognize these concepts in college classrooms, political debates, etc.

Anyone who wishes to be able to defend a Christian (or absolute Truth) worldview needs to read this book. It hits home the relativist philosophy, and how it is quickly given lip service, but cannot be lived as long as we wish to have some standard of morals and truth.

This book unveils relativism's fallacious "arguments" for what they are ... a self-destructing house of cards without moral foundation.

In their nearly exhaustive critique of relativism and its intrinsically bankrupt outworkings, Beckwith and Koukl have given those concerned with prevailing ethical ideologies new required reading. Using a quasi-deductive approach through a rational analysis of relativism's current state, the authors expose the utterly nonsensical logic and erroneous nature of moral relativism in a syllogistic manner. I am aware of no other contemporary work for the ethical layperson that accomplishes its stated goal of undermining relativism as well or as reasonably as this book has. As others have mentioned, this is a more than an adequate supplement to any college ethics course. For those concerned with how ethical relativism is winning over millions of people in our culture while the Christian ethic takes a backseat must know the arguments in this book to reverse the trend! It becomes painfully obvious that whatever form moral relativism takes, it still retains two features: 1. It does no "work" in the practical sense of the word, and 2. It sets itself up in strict opposition to the moral absolutism of the Christian. Equip yourself by reading this book, for its apologetic value is almost too great to quantify.

This book is an excellent addition to any thoughtful person's library concerning relativism, it's development and spread in popular culture. While the logic for the authors' arguments in the first parts of this book can be a little difficult to follow sometimes, the specific examples clarify their thoughts. I particularly liked Part 5 where the authors give ways to refute relativism since I am frequently at a loss for words when someone aggressively confronts me concerning my thoughts on relativism.