Moral Theory: An Introduction

by Mark Timmons

Moral Theory: An Introduction explores some of the most historically important and currently debated moral theories about the nature of the right and good. Providing an introduction to moral theory that explains and critically examines the theories of such classical moral philosophers as Aristotle, Aquinas, Kant, Bentham, Mill, and Ross, this book acquaints students with the work of contemporary moral philosophers. All of the book's chapters have been revised in light of recent work in moral theory. The second edition includes a new chapter on ethical egoism, an extensively revised chapter on moral particularism, and expanded coverage of divine command theory, moral relativism, and consequentialism. Additionally, this edition discusses recent work by moral psychologists that is making an impact on moral theory.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction

380 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2002

About the author

Dr. Mark Timmons is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Arizona. Dr. Timmons has published extensively in the fields of ethics and epistemology.

Reviews

[Karenina (Nina Ruthström) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Relativt lättbegripligt trots svårt ämne. Bra svårighetsgrad för en nybörjare. Jag gillar att han ger sin egen syn på de olika teorierna. Slutsats: etisk pluralism for the win!

[Boris Tizenberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great introductory book to moral theory. The author breaks down some of the most most influential and popular theories in palatable ways with clear examples. He also touches on the most common problems with each theory and how those have been addressed.

[Leo Horovitz · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was my first encounter with a scholarly treatment of ethics, having previously only read brief expositions of some central theories (mainly utilitarianism and consequentialism in general as well as divine command theories in the context of the religion/atheism debate). I have no further knowledge of the issues it's hard for me to evaluate the fairness of the book's treatment of the various theories, but as an introduction it seems to fare pretty well. Each chapter deals with a certain moral theory and they do so in a more or less uniform manner with every theory being given a systematic presentation of its basic structure along with somewhat brief discussion of some complications and variations along with common objections and attempts to answer the same by proponents of the theory in question. The treatment of these complications are, as mentioned, brief but many pointers to more in-depth literature is to be found throughout the book. Apart from the central theories explaining the nature of moral phenomena in terms of a set of unified principles, a few chapters deal with those theories of morality that don't quite fit this formula: moral relativism is dealt with early on, and moral pluralism (the idea that moral phenomena are not unified in the manner supposed by most other theories) and moral particularism (the idea that morality can not even be dealt with through fundamental principles) are encountered towards the end of the book. The exposition is clear and pedagogical and the author mostly succeeds in giving an unbiased description without favoring any one theory above the others. There is a possible point of departure from this assessment though: as the book progresses, it becomes increasingly clear that the author thinks any plausible moral theory will necessarily be of some pluralistic and minimal form, having multiple basic principles and being minimal in its reach and ability to determine the moral nature of actions. The one point this is perhaps most clear is the chapter when Ross' moral pluralism is treated, this is perhaps the one point in the book when the author, after having presented a specific moral theory, actually hints at a conclusion that the theory is plausible (perhaps even the most plausible theory of them all). Though this could perhaps be viewed as a form of fair an unbiased approach if one interprets it as being an expression of the view that no one theory is best and that therefore the most convincing theory is that there is some truth to all, or at least most monistic theories (I believe divine law theory is not given any credibility, but I'd have to go back and check to be certain) this assessment of authors position and presentation is not quite right. Firstly, balance can go too far, not every matter should be treated as if all parties have something sensible or convincing to say (it would be better not to assess the various positions at all than to conclude that they all have some part of the truth, especially in an introductory work) and secondly, the conclusion is not quite that the most convincing moral theory is a combination of all the monistic theories. Rather, the author's expressed position is that of support for a more or less specific pluralism giving weight to some aspects of some monistic theories but not others. The only plausible conclusion regarding the author's own position in this matter is that Ross' pluralistic moral theory is given a more positive treatment than the other theories, and while this is not a huge problem (I think all theories are given more or less a fair treatment), it still means there is some bias that should either have been eliminated completely, or taken responsibility for by the author much more clearly so that the reader would have been alerted to the fact that the author intends to take some time to express his own views alongside the otherwise unbiased presentation, which is fine, I think, even in an introductory work. Furthermore, such presentations of one's own views fit best in a concluding chapter (which this book does contain and which contains just such an expression of the author's own views) and should probably have been completely eliminated in the other chapters. In conclusion, this is a good exposition of the landscape (no explicit reference to Sam Harris' work intended, though I was probably subconsciously affected by that) of moral theories with just the right balance of shallow (in a good sense) descriptions accompanied by brief commentaries on the depth to be found in the contemporary debates and references to texts exposing such. Recommended.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book offers a very good presentation of various moral theories and concludes that all such theories, boiled down, turn into a version of limited moral pluralism. This is because of the complexity of ordinary moral thought and discourse. There is also no one fixed moral principle, or principles, that can yield determinative results on matters of moral importance. So a "moral judgment" is required to adjudicate moral dilemmas, or competition between conflicting principles.

The author is an anti-realist, but metaethical theory is not discussed here. I found his discussions of his hand picked (Divine Command, Relativism, Natural Law, Classic and Contemporary Utilitarianism, Kant, Moral Pluralism, Virtue Ethics, and Moral Particularism) to be extremely helpful and informative. One particular insight that stood out was his discussion of Kant's categorical imperative.

Many ethicists believe that Kant supplied two ((i) act so as not to use other people merely as means, but as ends, and (ii), do that maxim which you can at the same time will that it should be a universal law) versions of the Categorical Imperative CI. They usually treat (ii) and the best representation of the CI. But Timmons, taking his six point breakdown for evaluating moral theories as his guide, views (i) as the principle with *makes* actions right and (ii) as Kant's *action-guiding* principle. That is, (i) gives a fundamental *criterion* of right action and (ii) provides a *decision procedure* to guide moral deliberation rather than moral criterion. I found this to be a persuasive and helpful way of viewing Kant. This way, if correct, even allows for Kant to escape some of the criticisms directed his way. But, this view is also debated by Kant scholars, and so isn't an obvious reading of Kant. Since I'm not a Kantian, or a Kant scholar, I'll leave that debate for the experts.

I found myself frequently respecting many ethical theories that I had previously not given much credit to. This is, I believe, a credit to Timmons' explication of the various theories he discusses. Whether Timmons' moral theory succeeds, or his critiques hit their target, is not the subject of this review. That is something you will have to decide. Suffice it to say, since I am a moral realist, I'm at the other end of the ethical spectrum.

[Steff · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good introduction to ethical theories.



study book, not read everything:

2 -Divine command Theory
3 - Moral Relativism
4 - Natural Law Theory
5 - Consequentialism 1
6 - Consequentialism 2
7 - Ehtical Egoism
8 - Kan'ts Moral Theory
9 - Moral Pluralism
10 - Virtue Ethics
(not 1 & 11)

[Jake McAtee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good scope of the moral theory buffet.

[Albert · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good book covering a large range of normative ethics.
Mark Timmons is a big proponent of pluralistic ethics, which is clearly shown throughout the presentation of all the theories. In that regard, he is eager to propose pluralistic theories as being superior to their original forms. That prospect felt rather optimistic, and I personally had a hard time agreeing to that premise or perspective.
Moreover, I found some chapters to be explained at length, either for good or for bad. In some occasions I felt that he was repeating himself, although it could be due to the fact that I had already read a book on moral theory ( "The moral philosopher").
Other than that I felt the book was really comprehensive which is probably the strongest point of the book.

[Kristine · Rating 3 out of 5]

I mean, seeing as this was the book we used in Ethics class, I didn’t get as much enjoyment from reading it as I could have, mostly because I’m currently starting the revising for my exam where this book is my main source. It is very well written though. The explanations, the examples and the dilemmas are all very interesting and thought provoking. I do indeed recommend this book, as long as you don’t read it for class

[Jared Morningstar · Rating 4 out of 5]

A relatively exhaustive, engaging, and approachable introduction to moral theory. I found Timmons' discussions often illuminating, though at times I disagreed with the conclusions he reached. Overall I feel much more prepared to delve into more advanced and specific studies in morality after this read and as such I found the book was rather successful in achieving its goal.

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

good basic introduction to moral theory I guess but a lot of the book is kinda dull and dry, so don't go into this expecting a page-turner (but I suppose that's most philosophical literature)

[Envy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read one chapter

[Nic · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book presents a number of moral theories and goes through arguments for and against them. Easy enough to follow. For me it seemed a bit too shallow, so perhaps I have a different learning style.

[Nelia]

Read for uni ✨

[Hossein Samani · Rating 5 out of 5]

علی الحساب اینکه بهترین کتاب برای آشنایی با نظریه اخلاق، مشخصا اخلاق هنجاری.
برخلاف کتاب ناخوب گنسلر که موضع نویسنده در یک کتاب زمینه دنبال میشود دراینجا تیمونز همه تئوری های مهم اخلاق را با روایتی قابل قبول و ساده نه‌انگارانه دنبال می‌کند؛ و موضع قابل اعتنای خود در فلسفه کانت را در بحث ها دخالت نمیدهد.
طبقه بندی های کتاب بی نظیر است و نظمی عالی را دنبال می کند که درآن جای خوبی برای مباحتث جدید اخلاق (مثلا پژوهشهای جاشوا گرین) نیز وجود دارد