How Are We to Live?: Ethics in an Age of Self-Interest (Paperback)

by Peter Singer (Author) "In 1985 Ivan Boesky was known as 'the king of the arbitragers', a specialized form of investment in the shares of companies that were the..." (more)
Key Phrases: United States, New York, Adam Smith (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review
As Peter Singer wrote, "The problem is that most people have only the vaguest idea of what it might be to lead an ethical life. They understand ethics as a system of rules forbidding us to do things. They do not grasp it as a basis for thinking about how we are to live. They live largely self-interested lives, not because they were born selfish, but because the alternatives seem awkward, embarrassing, or just plain pointless. They cannot see any way of making an impact on the world, and if they could, why should they bother? -- Midwest Book Review

Product Description
B'Imagine that you could choose a book that everyone in the world would read. My choice would be this book.' Roger Crisp, Ethics Many people have an uneasy feeling that they may be missing out on something basic that would give their lives a significance it currently lacks. But how should we live? What is there to stop us behaving selfishly? In a highly readable account which makes reference to a wide variety of sources and everyday issues, Peter Singer suggests that the conventional pursuit of self-interest is individually and collectively self-defeating. Taking into consideration the beliefs of Jesus, Kant, Rousseau, and Adam Smith amongst others, he looks at a number of different cultures, including America, Japan, and the Aborigines to assess whether or not selfishness is in our genes and how we may find greater satisfaction in an ethical lifestyle. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 262 pages
• Publisher: Prometheus Books (May 1995)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0879759666
• ISBN-13: 978-0879759667
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.3 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 11.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #332,684 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

67 of 70 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars An audacious undertaking, and Singer pulls it off, February 18, 1999

By A Customer

Singer tackles "the big one," the meaning of life, in this book, and damned if he doesn't figure it out. In my opinion. (Your mileage may vary.) His approach is take you through a few thousand years of philosophy/economics/political science to get to the answer that a life spent trying to help others and reduce suffering is really the most moral, and most fulfilling one. It's a fascinating, and important, book. OK. I do have one small quibble. (Forgive me, I'm a quibbler.) Singer, correctly, I think, sees some uses of psychotherapy as self-indulgent and an attempt to rationalize away the moral emptiness that comes from leading a materialistically oriented life. However, I think he underestimates the need for people to come to terms with the forces that create a self that can't keep its "owner" from suffering. You have to be able to help yourself as well as others. The process of individuation, of becoming your own creative person, is important in human happiness. It's not as moral as purely devoting yourself to others, but I think there is room for both. I don't think Singer would disagree (maybe he would?). That, I think minor, quibble aside, I think the book is a really cool exploration of a really important question that we all ask ourselves, but that few (non-religious types) have spent enough time thinking about. I, for one, am glad that Peter Singer is around and thinking about it.

34 of 37 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Excellent for lay audience, fair for philosophers, February 18, 1999

By A Customer

I recently assigned this book for my Introduction to Ethics course. The early chapters reply to the argument that we are by nature selfish. Singer does an excellent job arguing that evolutionary theory demonstrates no such thing, while still leaving room for true ethical decision making (i.e. evolution also does not determine that we be ethical). His discussion of the prisoners dilemma is also quite clear and interesting. In later chapters he tries to convince his audience that they will be happier if they lead lives committed to ethics. The argument here is not as clear or as persuasive and my students began to find him annoying (especially his repeated use of vegetarians/animal rights activists as happy without any accompaning defense of the animal rights position). All in all though, it is quite wonderful that a philosopher has written a book that is so accessible for lay audiences.

10 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Singer, like Gandhi, knows "a way out of hell.", July 7, 1998

By	David Makinster (Massachusetts) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Singer compellingly shows how our misunderstanding of self-interest has led us to the brink of social and ecological disaster. He unmasks the errors that have led us down this path. Best of all, he offers an alternative -- a new understanding of self-interest, one that embraces both altruism and ethical integrity. What a humane and reasonable book!

To be sure, the book is not perfect. The chapter on Japan is dated, and the passages on animal rights and feminism are too brief to be more than "thought-starters." More importantly, Singer is sometimes less than balanced in his criticisms of other thinkers (e.g., Socrates, Kant, Jesus, Franklin).

But the virtues of the book, including it's readability, far outweigh it's limitations. Students in my Moral Issues course found the book engaging and illuminating.