Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad (FRANK COVEY LOYOLA L) [Paperback]

Michael Walzer (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0268018979 | ISBN-13: 978-0268018979 | Publication Date: March 1, 2006

In this book, Michael Walzer revises and extends the arguments first put forth in his influential Spheres of Justice and frames his ideas about justice, social criticism, and national identity in light of the new political world that has arisen in the past decade.

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

Walzer's aim in this book was to expand the arguments about distributive justice, social criticism, and nationalist politics that appeared in his Spheres of Justice (LJ 1/15/83) and to include the "new world marked by the collapse of the totalitarian project." Of the five essays here, three have appeared previously, in one form or another, in scholarly journals. The essays have a rambling, anecdotal quality more suitable to their presentation in 1993 as the Loyola Lectures in Political Analysis than to the more stringent requirements for publication as a monograph. In addition, the arguments are often too technical for the lay reader yet not rigorous or detailed enough for the academic. Walzer (social sciences, Inst. for Advanced Study, Princeton) has not added substantively to his earlier account, making this a marginal purchase for academic collections.
Leon H. Brody, U.S. Office of Personnel Mgt. Lib., Washington, D.C.
Copyright 1994 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

From Kirkus Reviews

Walzer (The Company of Critics, 1988, etc.) thoughtfully answers objections to his many influential volumes of social criticism. Walzer attempts to set out careful definitions for various terms that have arisen in public moral debate and beefs up the concepts behind his much discussed work. For him, moral reasoning is at its best when done at the ``thick'' level, in which the many components of individual and communal decision-making, history, and particularity can be dissected, analyzed, and accounted for. But it is the ``thin'' level of moral discourse (where generally recognizable slogans and terms predominate) that most often is the meeting point for intracultural and cross-cultural discussion and debate. Thus, the thin good of ending communism or providing aid to the needy is something that large numbers of people can agree on, but the thick good of making decisions about how to achieve such goals is more difficult. After five tight chapters, Walzer posits that we are all made up of several selves--based in our histories, identities, and associations--that we juggle as we confront a world of complex decisions and ambiguous choices. It is among those selves, rather than in a community of eager discussants, that the most profound moral reasoning occurs, a commentary on what Walzer perceives as the current sad state of public discussion and moral debate. Walzer emerges as a critic willing to take his punches, but who finds himself caught in a trap of sound-bite debate and thin sloganeering. Though Walzer could show himself more aware of some issues, especially gender and race, this is a well-argued, if not always energetic, set of carefully wrought ideas on the state of public moral debate. -- Copyright ©1994, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 120 pages
• Publisher: University of Notre Dame Press (March 1, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0268018979
• ISBN-13: 978-0268018979
• Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.5 x 0.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 5.9 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #437,323 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

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

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

13 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Michael Walzer on Thick and Thin, November 27, 2002

By A Customer

This review is from: Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad (FRANK COVEY LOYOLA L) (Paperback)

It has become widely popular to draw connections and similarities between the different people in our contemporary world. This might be done in terms of natural or universal human rights or in other ways, which aim to emphasise that we are all part of a common humanity and that we all share similar values despite our cultural differences. There is allegedly some basic morality, which we all share, and on this minimalist morality it is possible to build a thicker or maximalist understanding of morality. Michael Walzer in his book Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad argues that what is in question is much more complicated than that.

Despite its relatively limited number of pages (104 pages), Thick and Thin takes its reader on a voyage of discovering oneself. In the five chapters Michael Walzer approaches our understandings of morality and justice by initially explaining why it was possible or perhaps easy to sympathise with the people marching on the streets of Prague in 1989. In each consequent chapter, Walzer deepens his argument about the necessity of re-understanding our own minimalist and maximalist concepts of morality and how this is important not only in explaining domestic and international issues, but also in understanding them. In the final chapter, Walzer identifies how complex understandings are shaped and constructed by examining the divided self.

Originally the five chapters of Thick and Thin were first brought together as Lectures in Political Analysis at Loyola University, Chicago, in 1993 and published by University of Notre Dame Press the following year in the same form. As Walzer recognises, they are an extension to his earlier work such as Just and Unjust Wars and Spheres of Justice, and a response to the criticism he has received to his earlier work and ideas. Equally importantly, Walzer aims to strengthen his arguments in the new political world `marked by the collapse of the totalitarian project'.

In his colourful and intricate fashion, Walzer is able to appeal to the common reader and the specialist. Although he concentrates on such issues as self-determination and intervention, the basic principles of respect for the plurality of human societies and that there is no single, universal way in human affairs can be applied also elsewhere. We all share a minimalist morality in the sense that we could have marched with the people in Prague or Tienanmen Square in the name of freedom or justice, but `while we march in spirit with the men and women in Prague, we have in fact our own parade.'

We can unite behind a banner of justice, but how we understand its meaning is the constructed product of time and place. George Orwell's claim that `there's a statue inside every block of stone' does not hold to Walzer, who argues that Orwell's statue does not represent true minimalism. Minimalism, according to Walzer, begins with the statue that is then in a moment of crisis hastily constructed as a sketch, stick figure, to which others can allude to. We share an image of a statue, but we do not share its details: `What unites us at such a time is more the sense of a common enemy than the commitment to a common culture.' Walzer therefore stands earlier theories on their heads and argues that moral maximalism, whose `principles and procedures will have been worked out over a long period of time through complex social interactions', precedes moral minimalism.

Although Walzer argues that there is no single, final blueprint, he does contemplate that in international politics there is a universal moral minimalism expressed by the principle of self-determination. Despite its internal controversy, this guiding principle ought to be realised in international politics to the extent that self-determination should not be denied from groups, which actively seek it. Naturally, Walzer recognises that such issues are complex, and that there is no single way which could be applied to all cases. Walzer, in fact, strips the power of some common assumptions about the resulting chaos of bending to the will of separatist forces, and quite clearly sets out guidelines to how issues of self-determination and separatism ought to be dealt with: case by case. One of the most important aspects lies exactly here, and it would especially benefit most cosmopolitans to listen to Walzer on this point: although we might share common minimalist understandings with other societies, the way in which those ought to be realised are different due to the differences in our maximalist moralities; our way might not be the way for others.

The other important aspect in Walzer's writing is the insight to how the self not only divides itself among its interests and roles, among its identities and answers to many names, but that it also divides itself among its ideals, principles and values. Why some principles are more dominant than others at various times and places depends upon the self-critics within ourselves and their influence in us: `I have, let's say, fantasies of saintliness, but the critical voice that speaks for saintliness doesn't speak with very much immediacy or passion. This self-critic is relatively distant and disinterested since it knows (I know) that I am never going to hit that mark.' But another self-critic might speak from a closer position.

However, Walzer's arguments can be taken to imply some justification for moral irresponsibility. In attempting to communicate the connection between morality and time and place, Walzer simultaneously opens the door for justifying inconsistency in responses to crises. Similarly, his writings can be read to contain an internal conflict of simultaneously denying any universal principles or morality, and at the same time advocating for one: his own. Such a reading, though, is narrow and misses the very point Walzer tries to communicate. We begin with our own thick conceptions, but we can recognise the thin in others. In other words, although we might not agree with Walzer completely, there are necessarily some things in his argument that we recognise in ourselves despite our different backgrounds. In a manner, then, we actually completely agree with Walzer in the sense that his sketch of morality shares similar features as our sketch.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Walzer's Thick and Thin, September 4, 2004

By 

UberChris (Global Citizen) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad (FRANK COVEY LOYOLA L) (Paperback)

One can quite easily make the case that John Rawls, at least to a certain degree, laid the foundation for contemporary political thought. Michael Walzer, in the environment of said contemporary political theory, has certainly had his influence; and quite deservedly so. What is perhaps his best work concerning social justice is: Spheres of Justice, published in 1983.
Thick and Thin; A Moral Argument at Home and Abroad, is essentially marketed as an attempt at expounding upon the notions put forth in, Spheres of Justice. The work is a collection of five essays combined to total 108 pages. The first three chapters fail to make any contribution to the aforementioned, Spheres of Justice. The last two chapters do, however. Chapter Four gives insight into how his spheres and concepts of pluralism are to be applied to the international world. The fifth chapter illuminates notions of the make-up of the social critic and political theorist.
While not truly building upon, Spheres of Justice, this book will be both interesting and beneficial for those seriously interested in modern political discourse and theory, while the occasional reader of political philosophy will be rather dissapointed.