В данной книге попытку составить рейтинг ста великих евреев всех времен предпринял Майкл Шапиро - Hью-йоркский публицист и композитор. Легкий, порой ироничный стиль, доступное изложение достаточно сложных и запутанных проблем являются несомненными достоинствами этой книги. Конечно, не все читатели смогут согласиться с тезисом об определяющем влиянии иудаизма на морально-этические нормы человечества, на становление всех ведущих мировых религий. Однако автору удалось нарисовать на страницах книги живые портреты самых выдающихся евреев от Авраама и Моисея до Фрейда и Эйнштейна.

Contemporary accounts of what’s “natural” for human society still cite the thirteenth-century system of Thomas Aquinas – even on the Supreme Court. But those accounts ignore his biblical commentaries, which reveal something much stranger. Against the reigning impression, the commentaries embed all law, even the law of nature, in a sexually charged story of decline by specific ethnic groups – Jews and Gentiles – gendered in changing ways and redeemed by the reinsemination of divine grace. This book uses accounts of ethnicity and gender, nature and grace in Aquinas’s biblical commentaries to reframe the systematic works (especially his Summa theologiae) still quoted in court. The whole advantage of natural law is supposed to lie in its independence from any particular group, history, or religion. That is why rival views of gender and sexuality both appeal to “nature” and cite Aquinas. But Aquinas’s Summa ties natural law to specific biblical passages, where his commentary describes a nature that differs by ethnicity, varies over time, and changes sexuality by God’s decree. This destabilizes turn-of-the-twenty-first-century uses, liberal or conservative.

The language of rights is utilized frequently in debates over contemporary social issues—a fetus’s “right to life” versus a woman’s “right to choose,” for example. Because these debates pertain to what our social policies should be, it is clear that the rights in question are moral rights, and that existing legal rights ought to be changed or maintained accordingly. The problem, however, is that moral rights require moral justification. In Conflicts of Rights, John Rowan takes this next step, and investigates possible moral justifications for rights alleged to exist in four contexts: abortion, affirmative action, welfare, and pornography freedoms. In doing so, he reaches conclusions about the morally appropriate policy for each issue, and also about the effectiveness of rights language in general.

Joseph Raz presents a penetrating exploration of the interdependence of value, reason, and the will. The essays illuminate a wide range of questions concerning fundamental aspects of human thought and action. The book is a summation of many years of original, compelling, and influential work by a major contemporary philosopher.

In Essays on the History of Ethics Michael Slote collects his essays that deal with aspects of both ancient and modern ethical thought and seek to point out conceptual/normative comparisons and contrasts among different views. Arranged in chronological order of the philosopher under discussion, the relationship between ancient ethical theory and modern moral philosophy is a major theme of several of the papers and, in particular, Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Kant, and/or utilitarianism feature centrally in (most of) the discussions. One essay seeks to show that there are three main ways to conceive the relationship between human well-being and virtue: one is dualistic a la Kant (they are disparate notions); one is the sort of reductionism familiar from the history of utilitarianismm; and one, not previously named by philosophers, is implicit in the approach the Stoics, Plato, and Aristotle take (in their different ways) to the topic of virtue and well-being. Slote names this third approach "elevationism" and argue that it is more promising than either reductionism or dualism. Two of the essays are narrowly focused on Hume's ethics, and one seeks to show that even Kant's opponents have reason to accept a number of important and original Kantian ideas. Finally, the two last essays in the volume talk about ethical thought during the last half of the twentieth century and the first few years of the twenty-first, arguing that the care ethics of Carol Gilligan and Nel Noddings has a distinctive and important contribution to make to ongoing ethical theorizing--and to our understanding of the history of ethics as well.

While we would like to believe that forensic science professionals are intrinsically ethical by nature, the reality is that these individuals have moral compasses as varied as those of any individual you may know. They confront ethical dilemmas every day, some with clear-cut protocols and others that frequently have no definitive answers. Ethics and the Practice of Forensic Science explores the range of ethical issues facing those who work in the field and highlights the complicated nature of ethical decision-making in this complex arena.

Euthanasia, Ethics and the Law argues that the law governing the ending of life in England and Wales is unclear, confused and often contradictory. The book shows that the rules are in competition because the ethical principles underlying the rules are also diverse and conflicting. In mounting his case Richard Huxtable considers some familiar and topical debates, including assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia, examining such situations as the Dianne Pretty litigation and Lord Joffe's Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill. The book also enters some important, but less well-charted areas, looking at the advent of 'death tourism' and the real status of involuntary and passive euthanasia in English law, in addition to clarifying the confusion that surrounds the use of powerful painkillers like morphine. Dealing with both legal and ethical issues, the text concludes that the time has come to more openly adopt a compromise position - one that more honestly recognises and accommodates the competing values, whilst also restoring a measure of coherence to the law.

Vol. 1 : Abortion - Cognitive Dissonans. - 756 p.

Americans cannot live with judicial review, but they cannot live without it. There is something characteristically American about turning the most divisive political questions - like freedom of religion, same-sex marriage, affirmative action, and abortion - into legal questions with the hope that courts can answer them. In Judicial Review in an Age of Moral Pluralism Ronald C. Den Otter addresses how judicial review can be improved to strike the appropriate balance between legislative and judicial power under conditions of moral pluralism. His defense of judicial review is predicated on the imperative of ensuring that the reasons that the state offers on behalf of its most important laws are consistent with the freedom and equality of all persons. Den Otter ties this defense to a theory of constitutional adjudication based on John Rawls's idea of public reason and argues that a law that is not sufficiently publicly justified is unconstitutional, thus addressing when courts should invalidate laws and when they should uphold them even in the midst of reasonable disagreement about the correct outcome in particular constitutional controversies.

"Liberal Utilitarianism and Applied Ethics" explores the foundations of early utilitarianism as well as the theoretical basis of social ethics and policy in modern Western welfare states. Matti Hayry shows how philosophers have misunderstood the very nature of utilitarianism since the turn of the 19th century and identifies the resulting problems in contemporary utilitarianism. Hayry argues that when the classical utilitarian principles of happiness, hedonism and impartiality are combined, the ensuing ethical theory may demand that we act immorally or unjustly. This is because the scope of the utilitarian theory has been extended too far. Hayry develops a more limited utilitarian theory based on the ethos of early British universal altruism. He argues that a limited version of liberal utilitarianism and the methods of applied ethics should be employed to define our moral duties and rights. This is an important book in current discussions on social ethics and policy. Hayry's accomplished defense of utilitarian morality is certain to provoke debate.

This book explores the thesis that legal roles force people to engage in moral combat, an idea that is implicit in the assumption that citizens may be morally required to disobey unjust laws, while judges may be morally required to punish citizens for civil disobedience. Heidi Hurd advances the surprising argument that the law cannot require us to do what morality forbids. Moral Combat is a sophisticated, well-conceived and carefully argued book on a very important and controversial topic at the junction between legal and political philosophy. It will be of interest to moral, legal, and political philosophers, as well as teachers and students of professional ethics in law.

Asymmetric conflict is changing the way that we practise and think about war. Torture, rendition, assassination, blackmail, extortion, direct attacks on civilians, and chemical weapons are all finding their way to the battlefield despite longstanding international prohibitions. This book offers a practical guide for policy makers, military officers, students, and others who ask such questions as: Do guerillas deserve respect or long jail sentences? Are there grounds to torture guerillas for information or assassinate them on the battlefield? Is there room for nonlethal weapons to subdue militants and safeguard the lives of noncombatants? Who are noncombatants in asymmetric war? What is the status of civilians who shelter and aid guerillas? And, do guerillas have any right to attack civilians, particularly those who aid and shelter members of the stronger army? If one side can expand the scope of civilian vulnerability, then why can't the other? To read and comment on Michael Gross's blog article on the UN Human Rights Council Report on Gaza

Divisions abound about whether politics should be held to a higher moral standard or whether pragmatic considerations or realpolitik should prevail. The two poles are represented most conspicuously by Aristotle, for whom the proper aim of politics is moral virtue, and Machiavelli, whose prince in contrast exalted political pragmatism over morality. The fourteen contributors to this volume are predominantly arrayed on the Aristotelian end of the continuum, although several moral skeptics and pragmatists do enter the fray. These essays address perennial concerns in political and moral theory and underscore the rekindled yearning of many to hold the political realm to a higher standard despite the skepticism of dissenters who question the likelihood or even the desirability of success.

In Natural Ethical Facts William Casebeer argues that we can articulate a fully naturalized ethical theory using concepts from evolutionary biology and cognitive science, and that we can study moral cognition just as we study other forms of cognition. His goal is to show that we have "softly fixed" human natures, that these natures are evolved, and that our lives go well or badly depending on how we satisfy the functional demands of these natures. Natural Ethical Facts is a comprehensive examination of what a plausible moral science would look like.Casebeer begins by discussing the nature of ethics and the possible relationship between science and ethics. He then addresses David Hume's naturalistic fallacy and G. E. Moore's open-question argument, drawing on the work of John Dewey and W. V. O. Quine. He then proposes a functional account of ethics, offering corresponding biological and moral descriptions. Discussing in detail the neural correlates of moral cognition, he argues that neural networks can be used to model ethical function. He then discusses the impact his views of moral epistemology and ontology will have on traditional ethical theory and moral education, concluding that there is room for other moral theories as long as they take into consideration the functional aspect of ethics; the pragmatic neo-Aristotelian virtue theory he proposes thus serves as a moral "big tent." Finally, he addresses objections to ethical naturalism that may arise, and calls for a reconciliation of the sciences and the humanities. "Living well," Casebeer writes, "depends upon reweaving our ethical theories into the warp and woof of our scientific heritage, attending to the myriad consequences such a project will have for the way we live our lives and the manner in which we structure our collective moral institutions."