The Elements of Moral Philosophy

This book was a textbook for an ethics class I am currently taking. I read the book before class started, and at first I was pleased with it. But then about 40-60 pages into it, I got into the extremely biased portion that I had not seen to that point. Consider a statement like this: "...if we look at other things the Bible says, it does not appear to be a reliable guide to morality." The author then goes on to cite several verses, each of which is used to prove the previous statement. What the author fails to realize is that we as Christians are under the New Covenant. Each of these verses is from the Old Testament, before Jesus died on the Cross for our sins. If the author had taken the time to look at the New Testament, he would have discovered that his argument is completely faulty. Likewise, he uses a similar argument to suggest that the Bible condones abortion. He cites 3 verses, all of which again are from the Old Testament. The first is a faulty argument because it was dealing with Judah and Tamar. Judah called for Tamar's execution until he found out she was his daughter-in-law. Then he said, "She was more righteous than me," and Tamar was not executed because Judah was at fault, not Tamar. The second reference is also faulty: it was dealing only with priests daughters, and not the daughters of all the Israelites. The priests were holy just as God was holy, and therefore there could be no sexual immorality among the priest's family. The third is in reference to all Israelites - however, let us not forget that God held the Israelites to a higher standard than the rest of his people. Why? They are his Chosen, and therefore ought to be set apart. As such, consistently, the statement made at the end of each section of the giving of the law is that the evil must be driven out of Israelite society. There are a great many more logical errors also in this book, too numerous to count, and, for the most part, revolving around supposed Scriptural fallacies. The author consistently fails to recognize that he is taking the Scriptures out of context. Money is regarded as evil in the New Testament, according to him. But if he had read the Scripture, he would have realized that Jesus did not say money was evil, but that the love of money was evil. God is quite practical; He most certainly realizes without currency, society will fall apart. The author consistently makes illogical conclusions (especially about Scripture or Christianity), and uses these illogical conclusions to disprove Christianity.To the book's credit, the author does an excellent job refuting relativism; namely, subjectivism. He also describes Kantian ethics and Utilitarianism quite well, providing both the reasons people are drawn to each philosophy and the logical fallacies of the philosophy. I wish the author had been as thorough with his research on Christianity and Judaism as he had been on relativism, Kantian ethics and Utilitarianism.

This was exactly what I needed. Thank you!

I am not widely read in ethics or philosophy in general. I took an introductory philosophy course as an undergrad and did not return to studying ethics until graduate school, which is where I came into contact with this book. For me, as a novice in ethics, I found Rachels' text enlightening. He neither dwells on theory too long nor dabbles too much in case studies. He provides enough to give you a foundational understanding of the big theories in ethics. Sure, there are probably holes in the material and you probably won't be able to dazzle others with your sudden powers of ethical thought, but it does get you to think about ethics in ways that are almost exciting. Compared to the other textbooks I had in my ethics class, this was a joy to read. The price, as others have said, is too high. But if you have to study it in class, you can't really get around that anyway.

Had to have this for a class. Hated the actual book very hard to read but it did what it was intended to do and that was to get me through a very hard ethics college class!

Bought as textbook for a class. This is just a brief overview of the various topics within the subject, you won't find anything in depth here. It's a small book, about the size of a paperback chapter book for older elementary aged readers. Not too long, not too big, didn't weigh down my backpack. It suited it's purpose for my class, but it was not a book I held onto in case I would need it again. If you're looking for a good overview, this is the book. If you're looking to really dig into the subject, you could start here, but you'll need more books or resources to help out.

This book is just plain out biased and I would not reccommend to someone looking into true philosophy. I had to take a class with this book and it was just totally dumb.

Bought this for a class in college. It was one of a few books that actually had a few good readings in it.I resold the book after the class for some cash, but I considered keeping this one.Shame that they have to cost so much, I hate getting rid of books.

In today's world, we can all benefit from understanding this topic.This is a frequently cited college text and is very deep and broad in its coverage of the topic.I much prefer the Jonathan Sanford series which presents the same material using the context of pop culture references:My favorite two are: "Spider-Man and Philosophy: The Web of Inquiry" & "Batman and Philosophy: The Dark Knight of the Soul"This is more of a textbook and as such is dryer but, is one of the highest rated on the topic you can find.

Arrived on time and as advertised.As far as the content - the book is clear and easy to read. I don't find myself always agreeing with the authors conclusions, but that's to be expected.

Quick. The book was pristine when arrived. Very pleased.Recommended for students or for leisure. Very interesting and easy to read.