Skip to main content

Agonizing over Ethics



Mind you, calling ethics ‘agonizing’ maybe puts the thing on the wrong footing. Because this book, the follow-up to 101 Philosophy Problems, is great fun. It surprised my very shrewd Routledge editor, Tony, who hesitated over the idea saying that hardly any one read ethics and we didn’t want to tie 101 Philosophy Problems to a lead balloon.

But as anyone who has read both books will know, there’s plenty of overlap between a philosophy problem and an ethical dilemma. The thinking is the same and if presented as riddles, they can appeal to the same audience.
Ethics is about choices which matter, and choices which matter are dilemmas. the Greek word means 'two horns'. ... But ethics is a deep well, and once you start to lower the bucket, there comes no obvious jolt to tell you that at last it has reached the bottom.
Actually, despite Tony's initial doubts, 101 Ethical Dilemmas went on to be one of my most successful titles, selling I think about 150 000 copies and going again into about 15 foreign editions. That may not sound a lot to writers of pop fiction but for a serious academic study of ethics, it, well, changed the rules of the game.

Again, for people interested in such things, I didn't really get much money for the book, but I did enjoy writing it, and I was even a keynote speaker at a state-run, meaning Communist Party run, Conference on the Environment: Yunnan Province, China. My topic was: How Indigenous Rights and Ecological Duties go Hand-in-Hand.

The paper I gave, and no I wasn't put up to do this, I could have done anything I wanted, looked at the way the European settlers in Australia had systematically exterminated both the indigenous people of the land and the animal populations. (Later on, I'd also write about specific cases of genocide in my ‘black armband’ alternative travel guidebook No Holiday.) However, 101 Ethical Dilemmas particularly looked at the question of species and extinction - what value does a species have? Why do we put so little resources into saving them? But I also noted in the book the link to human society.. narrow social interests often trump wider ecological values.

Anyway, it was a great conference (big shout out to Professor Lisa Wang for organising my trip! And much else besides... ) and I will always remember the warm and open way the Chinese received these controversial ideas. By contrast, when I gave a similar paper in Australia at a conference at Queensland University of Technology a former member of the Queensland government stood up and insisted that I be prevented from continuing, and (get this) the chair of the meeting agreed with him! He said to me, the person about five minutes into a half hour presentation, ‘you’ve had your say, now let’s hear some views from the audience’. So there was no room for this debate in Australia and yet there was in communist China. It all goes to underline a key ethical principle, don't believe what's written on the tin, check out the contents of the tin itself.

So, ethics, as I approached it, is a series of perplexing riddles and challenging debates, not at all the way it is taught in universities and schools as 'platitudes' and logical rules.


* This was a more hopeful, open China. A sad contrast with recent policy which has led to the terrible events going on in Xinjiang today... but as Ian Keith recently argued, China remains crucial to preserving global biodiversity.

Popular posts from this blog

Chewing over FOOD!

Readers who know my strong slant towards FRUIT AND VEG in I Think Therefore I Eat, will maybe be puzzled to find me taking on the vegans recently. Nonetheless, that is where I felt the truth of the extraordinarily complex food arguments lies and philosophy takes us where the truth is whether we like it or not!
The Observer (London) even accused me of waging ‘culture wars’ and wondered: Is it possible that a combination of well-meaning philanthropists and large agricultural concerns have united to exploit health fears for financial gain, while neglecting the nutritional shortcomings in their recommendations? Anyway, in the event I was delighted to work with the brilliant Frédéric Leroy on this article, which basically follows up a request he received from the influential European Food Agency to raise public awareness about the complexity of food issues and the implicatons of simple ‘one size fits all’ solutions.

Our piece kicked off a public information campaign which included coverage…

Puzzling over Philosophy Problems

When it first came out way back in the last century (sighs) 101 Philosophy Problems was quite an iconoclast. Up to then, the most radical book of philosophy was Bertrand’s Problems of Philosophy, and that book splits the problems into boring categories like logic and epistemology...

So I knew, as a young(ish) philosophy teacher, there was room for a new look at the subject, and 101 PP was it. In time it went on to  sell (I think) about 250 000 copies in about 20 languages. I don’t know for sure as the publisher, Routledge, seemed to think it was a bit vulgar to keep track of things such as sales figures, although they gave me a nice lunch in London!

Here's a taste of the book, a problem that up to then had been summed up as a  landmark philosophical problem concerning our understanding of descriptive knowledge situated somewhere the field of epistemology... but I reinvented as simply the Problem of the Cow in the Field:

Farmer Field is concerned about his prize cow, Daisy. In fact…

Talking about THINKING

What are the 4 Principles of Critical Thinking? Critical thinking and Philosophy In November 2018 I had the pleasure of chatting with Michael Frank about the ‘ingredients of the critical thinker’. (I’m not saying I have them all, mind!) Here's a bit of what we said:

Michael: If you were to build the perfect critical thinker in a lab, what habits or what qualities would they have?

Martin: Well, I recommend four principles. The first one is surely the most important!
Critical Thinkers are people who are tolerant and open-minded to new ideas. There are many people who describe themselves as critical thinkers who dogmatic and intolerant and quick to jump on anyone for the slightest fallacy. But that to me is not a true critical thinker. A critical thinker wants to give people the space and freedom to let them develop their ideas, and to allow them to express more information which can then be evaluatedThey don’t waste time trying to win arguments. They don’t want to win the argument. The…