|
|
1.0 out of 5 stars
Dangerous, questionable, smarmy; worse than useless, May 13 2003
By A Customer
First, every well-educated person's library should have at least one good ethics book. Second, this book ain't it.The author gives a series of case studies and then shows how he would quickly solve the complicated ethics problems he sometimes presents. The main point I seem to infer from this book is that ethics is sort of like quantum physics or neurosurgery -- people can be shown how problems are solved by the experts, but they should not expect to be able to do it themselves -- in other words, ethics is too complicated to be left to ordinary individuals. I consider this conclusion not only wrong, but also potentially dangerous and inconsistent with liberal democracy. Cohen's approach seems to be a type of "virtue ethics," which essentially argues that ethics depends on a well-refined character rather than consequences or universal principles. Virtue ethics can be truly wonderful and essential, but usually not when standing alone in a diverse democracy and usually not when advocted by someone without superb credentials. This view is compatible with a democracy if and only if the definition of character is universally accepted, and the population has been highly educated to develop, respect, refine, and maintain such character. Failing this, such an approach effectively relies on "philosopher kings," who will decide what is right and wrong for all (and, I assume, these "philosopher kings" will be either lawyers or professional ethicists). We've already conceded justice in this country to lawyers, with disastrous consequences for justice, and heaven help us if we should do the same with morality and ethics. Bless their hearts, we need lawyers and ethicists, but they should be watched v-e-r-r-y carefully. Another quarrel I have with this book is the same quarrel I have with Mr. Cohen's New York Times articles -- the author's views are often inconsistent and downright wrong. One case in point is his view on those college honor codes which require students to turn in known and verified cheaters. Mr Cohen feels this is "tattling," which can be effectively ignored by an ethical person, even if this means cheaters can continue to take advantage of the system. Well, let me tell you something -- if I know of someone who is falsifying aircraft maintenance records, and do not "tattle," I could rightly be considered an accessory to a crime, and could be partially liable for killing hundreds of people if their planes crash because of faulty repairs. Mr Cohen never draws a line between minor "tattling" and a crime of collaboration, and he never indicates how (or if) he would draw that line. If a person does not develop a respect for honesty in a training situation like college, just where are they going to develop it? College honor codes can help institute the kind of character that Mr Cohen's "virtue ethics" requires, and can do so without much formal training in ethics. This is just one case in point. Last and least, the author's writing style often seems insufferably smug and smarmy. Yecch. Poor writing is not necessary for good ethics. Alternatives include Arthur Dobrin's "Ethics for Everyone," or ... almost any other book. I hope that professional ethicists won't do to ethics what lawyers have done to justice, but after reading this book, I am far less hopeful.
|
