Your first instinct might be to say that it is really easy to be a good person. But is that the case? On the surface, you might say – you should not lie, cheat, steal (and listen to Heavy Metal music) and voila – you are a good person.
Yes, okay, but WHY are you “automatically” good if you do these things, we might ask – or we might dismiss such a question with a thought of the sort “because stealing is against the law”. Okay, but what about lying? Or cheating, for that matter? Are the answers always so clear? What about if you’re lying, cheating or stealing to prevent or stop a greater injustice?
How about using violence? When is it justified to use violence to stop a greater injustice? When is it permissible to take a life? Yes, it seems we are a bit less certain now. Or are we still very sure to have all the answers?
We might be tempted to say that is why we have laws, to tell us what is right and what is wrong, and under which circumstances. Okay, but we should be aware that the rules are artificial and, as such, imperfect—and we should not forget that, throughout history, laws have been constantly revised, rescinded, amended, and expanded.
So, there should be some basic moral rules to serve as a “source” of the laws, shouldn’t there? Optimally, yes. There should be a so-called “objective morality” that determines what is good and what is bad – sort of a foundation of our rules – something not dependent upon the beliefs of a particular culture at a certain point in time.
You might have noticed that certain TV shows and films hint at this with their main character asking a question like, “What if their culture says it’s good to torture babies?”
The point is – we cannot give in to moral relativism and say, “It’s their law.” We should strive to determine whether specific rules are universal.
So, how do we do that? Indeed, we do not have some “morality Geiger counter” that we would point at space, then have it beep, and then go in this direction to find the morality, as if it were something tangible.
But in essence, we need to do something similar, not with a physical device, but with our intellect. We would pick a potential ethical issue, think it through, and, when our logic and reason point us in the right direction, hopefully be on the right track to uncover the elusive groundwork for a particular rule.
That is essentially where this book and books like it step in. You see, humanity has already intensely scrutinised various ethical issues, and we have reached some reasonable conclusions on multiple fronts.
This book, as you will see, is not the alpha and omega of ethics, or of what we should do and how we should behave; it is simply a collection of deep thoughts and conclusions the author has been having on various topics.
And it is indeed quite a collection, for the book attempts to do just what we have been talking about – objectively determine what is ethical and why, across various themes.
Practical Ethics is, just as the name suggests, a book that concerns itself more with the real world and less with philosophical notions of what the truth is or what morality is anyway, and as such, it is a perfect starting point for people interested in living an ethical life to the best of their abilities. It concerns itself with the following themes, which are divided into chapters:
- Equality and Its Implications
- Equality for Animals?
- What’s Wrong with Killing?
- Taking Life: Animals
- Taking Life: The Embryo and Fetus
- Taking Life: Humans
- Rich and Poor
- Climate Change
- The Environment
- Civil Disobedience, Violence and Terrorism
As you can see from the list of topics alone, the book indeed concerns itself with the ethics of the real world – issues of equality, euthanasia, abortion, the divide between the rich and the poor, the environment, and, generally speaking, almost every theme we concern ourselves with.
The author is meticulous in examining pro and counter-arguments from all sides in every theme. What you do not see very often, but indeed see here, is that Signer discusses objections to his conclusions. He does this in great detail, so it feels like a debate rather than him simply trying to convince you with arguments from only one side.
Of course, as with many books of this type, you have an enjoyable experience reading it – engaging in the sense that you might get deep into thoughts about an argument, and you might follow the book until a certain point is made – and then you are like: “Yes, that’s it. I finally understand why that is so, I believe I have now formed my opinion about it”, only to have the author make another point about the problem and have that point impact upon the earlier conclusion – so you find yourself saying that maybe you should not have been so hasty to consider the issue resolved.
What is particularly amusing is that you, in time, come to expect this – you start to think along the lines “That can’t be everything that there is. I bet he’s gonna bring yet another argument against it”. It’s quite a ride.
The best part is that a particular doctrine or faith does not limit him, and he is not afraid to ask tough questions. And I feel that we need more books like this, that, as Kafka said, have the potential to make you angry. Because if you read only to be comforted, then you are not growing.
This book, like the author’s other work, “Animal Liberation“, has inspired many people to rethink what they thought they had already figured out. And it will undoubtedly do the same for you. How do I know? It will be hard for you to put it down, as it tackles such serious and important issues. Yet, it is not too difficult to read – you do not need to have any introduction to philosophy, Latin lessons or a course in formal logic to be able to understand it.
So, it makes the big questions accessible to the general public – you do not need to be a philosopher to understand them – and that is the best recommendation. Do not think, however, that it is shallow. It’s just that the author took his time to make the arguments as simple as possible, without losing too much or clouding the issues for an average person, while avoiding too much philosophical jargon.
I particularly find the various chapters on killing very well argued, reasoned, and thoughtful, as they should be for such a serious topic. The chapter about climate change is also guaranteed to make you stop and think for a bit, as it offers some, I would say, somewhat unique points.
Although it is very possible you will not agree with all the conclusions in this book – I am still not sure that I agree with all of them – you will find it rewarding that you stuck with it and took this first step on a journey called “thinking for yourself”.
Take some time to read this. You will be glad you did.
