Summary
Title: Meditations for the Humanist: Ethics for a Secular Age
Author: A.C. Grayling
Publisher: Oxford University Press
ISBN: 0195151585
Pro:
• Covers a wide variety of social, personal and ethical issues
• Raises interesting questions about life and living
Con:
• None
Description:
• Series of topical essays dealing with ethics, society, and personal issues
• Focuses on asking interesting questions rather than providing definitive answers
• Provides a lot to think about and challenges to conventional wisdom
Book Review
Socrates’ dictum is the guiding principle behind a recent book from A.C. Grayling. For him, a life without examination and reflection is a life without goals or integrity. A person who reflects upon life is one who chooses the nature of that life and lives it directly — and that is what makes life really worth living.
To that end, Grayling has collected a series of articles on a variety of related topics dealing with ethics, politics, and humanity. They are not essays designed to provide final or definitive answers — just the opposite, actually.
If we think that we have final answers, we have nothing to reflect upon. Instead, these essays put forward ideas and arguments which should be given serious consideration: even if you don’t agree with Grayling’s conclusions, you will still have a lot to think about.
Is the examined life a happier life? Perhaps it can be, but that is not necessarily true. Why pursue such a life if it does not make you happier — isn’t happiness the goal of life? Once again, not necessarily. If we could put a drug in the water to make everyone happy, should we do it? Would that be ethical? Probably not. This would result not simply in happy people, but in a passive condition which would not include knowledge, progress, striving and improvement. These are the consequence of an examined life and happiness is often, but not necessarily, their accompanying result.
A life of reflection is based on personal autonomy and responsibility. Because of this, traditional theistic religion is often the enemy of such a life. Religion often promotes submission to the will of some god, eliminating autonomy. Among the topics we can reflect upon, ethical issues are among the most important — but that is no longer possible with an “ultimate” god.
With a god, ethical inquiry is little more than casuistry, the study of divine commands. One either follows orders, or one does not. Reflection and consideration are simply irrelevant — there is only obedience:
- ”Sin is disobedience to God; morality is about relationships, responsibility and concern. Religion deals in absolutes; but in the wide variousness of the human condition there are no absolutes, only competing goods and desires.”
A sound ethical system must be able to stand on its own rather than rely upon the threat of divine punishment. Traditional religion also relies upon faith, which also conflicts with the life of examination. Faith ends reflection because it reaches a conclusion without reason or evidence:
- ”Faith is a negation of reason. Reason is the faculty of proportioning judgment to evidence, after first weighing the evidence. Faith is belief even in the face of contrary evidence. Soren Kierkegaard defined faith as the leap taken despite everything, despite the very absurdity of what one is asked to believe.”
Grayling promotes, then, a humanistic ethic and alternative to religious dogma. He is not trying to teach facts or doctrine — instead, he is trying to teach how to think about facts and doctrines. Today, people regard education as a means to getting a job; thus, education is not a means for creating individuals, but rather instruments in the economic process. Is this not a violation of the basic ethical principle of treating people not simply as means but as ends in themselves? This is what Grayling hopes to change by encouraging thought and reason over dogma and doctrine. He encourages people to read actively rather than passively, to engage ideas rather than simply accepting them, to live rather than simply exist.
Grayling has no answers to teach, but he has some very good questions to ask and some insightful points to make. This is probably not a very good book for reading through in one or two sittings — indeed, that may be a violation of the spirit of the book itself. Instead, it should perhaps be read just one or two essays at time, allowing you time to ponder what he has to say and working through your own perspective on the issues he raises.
