What do you think?
Rate this book
Reclaiming the Christian Intellectual Tradition
Ethics and Moral Reasoning: A Student's Guide
From drone warfare to gay marriage, the modern world is full of ethical conundrums stemming from a plethora of amazing technological advances and dramatic cultural shifts. Challenging the relativism so rampant in our society today, C. Ben Mitchell helps us thoughtfully engage our morally confused world in this introduction to ethics from a distinctly Christian perspective. Drawing on insights from key historical figures and modern Christian ethicists such as Stanley Hauerwas and N. T. Wright, this book will help you embrace a holistic approach to moral reasoning that is founded on Scripture and informed by history.
112 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 2013
35 people are currently reading
100 people want to read
About the author
C. Ben Mitchell
23 books2 followersC. Ben Mitchell is associate professor of bioethics and contemporary culture at Trinity International University, Deerfield, Illinois.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
October 29, 2020
2020 reads: 44/52
Rating: 3 stars
Rating: 3 stars
October 23, 2023
It is a nice overview, if a little broad at times. I especially appreciated his comparison of biblical and enlightenment ethics.
March 11, 2020
According to the series preface the book should be aimed at "Christian students and others associated with college and university campuses, including faculty, staff, trustees, and other various constituents" (11). However the book is too cursory for college use. It may be better for introducing high school students to ethics, but if it isn't supplemented students won't have a firm grasp (and may even have an inaccurate grasp) of the ethical systems that are touched on.
For instance, Mitchell states that "An 'ought' claim cannot be derived from an 'is' claim" (29). But no mention is made of how virtue theorists attempt to get around this problem, which seems relevant given that the book later makes positive reference to virtue theory generally (which requires some solution here) and MacIntyre specifically who specifically attempted to show how to avoid the problem.
More importantly, inaccuracy might be an independent problem for the book in one or two places. The first chapter discusses relativism and, in laying out the relativist position, Mitchell refers to Pojman's construction of the argument as resting upon the diversity thesis and the dependency thesis.
According to Mitchell, the dependency thesis "holds that morality depends on human nature, the human condition, or specific sociocultural circumstances, or a combination of all three" (25). However according to Pojman and Fieser, the dependency thesis is that “All moral principles derive their validity from cultural acceptance” (Ethics, 7th ed. p. 19). Notice that the dependency thesis is specifically about conventional ethical relativism or cultural relativism.
The reason the difference matters is that the way Mitchell defines it (as a premise belonging to the broader class of relativism) it allows him to move from ethical relativism to a discussion of “ethical hedonism” (25) and views that might "maintain that what’s right and wrong depends upon the human condition, such as that humans are mortal" (26). This misleadingly gives the impression that ethical hedonists or any view which closely binds ethics to "the human condition" (virtue theory, natural law) are relativists.
Unfortunately, Mitchell doesn't cite any specific source after referring to Pojman's two premise scheme on pages 24-26. Based on later references to the book, Mitchell is using the 5th edition of Pojman's Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong (E:DRW) and it's possible (though it seems unlikely to me) that this accounts for the issue above.
But Mitchell's later references to Pojman are also out of step with the 7th edition of E:DRW. On page 74 Mitchell refers to Pojman's critique in E:DRW of action-based ethics (ABEs), giving the impression that Pojman endorses the critiques. But in the 7th edition the critiques are presented from a neutral standpoint. And what Mitchell refers to as the "spiritual dimension" problem for ABE is presented as the "spontaneous dimension" in the 7th edition.
It's plausible that these discrepancies are due to different editions of the book, where Fieser attempted to move the book in a more secular and "neutral" direction after Pojman's death (and this would explain some of the confusing switches I mentioned in my review that book)... but I don't have access to the 5th edition and can't check. If this is the case, then I still think the responsibility falls on Mitchell's shoulders to check later editions that his readers will most likely have access to and make them aware that such changes were made to later editions of the book.
For instance, Mitchell states that "An 'ought' claim cannot be derived from an 'is' claim" (29). But no mention is made of how virtue theorists attempt to get around this problem, which seems relevant given that the book later makes positive reference to virtue theory generally (which requires some solution here) and MacIntyre specifically who specifically attempted to show how to avoid the problem.
More importantly, inaccuracy might be an independent problem for the book in one or two places. The first chapter discusses relativism and, in laying out the relativist position, Mitchell refers to Pojman's construction of the argument as resting upon the diversity thesis and the dependency thesis.
According to Mitchell, the dependency thesis "holds that morality depends on human nature, the human condition, or specific sociocultural circumstances, or a combination of all three" (25). However according to Pojman and Fieser, the dependency thesis is that “All moral principles derive their validity from cultural acceptance” (Ethics, 7th ed. p. 19). Notice that the dependency thesis is specifically about conventional ethical relativism or cultural relativism.
The reason the difference matters is that the way Mitchell defines it (as a premise belonging to the broader class of relativism) it allows him to move from ethical relativism to a discussion of “ethical hedonism” (25) and views that might "maintain that what’s right and wrong depends upon the human condition, such as that humans are mortal" (26). This misleadingly gives the impression that ethical hedonists or any view which closely binds ethics to "the human condition" (virtue theory, natural law) are relativists.
Unfortunately, Mitchell doesn't cite any specific source after referring to Pojman's two premise scheme on pages 24-26. Based on later references to the book, Mitchell is using the 5th edition of Pojman's Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong (E:DRW) and it's possible (though it seems unlikely to me) that this accounts for the issue above.
But Mitchell's later references to Pojman are also out of step with the 7th edition of E:DRW. On page 74 Mitchell refers to Pojman's critique in E:DRW of action-based ethics (ABEs), giving the impression that Pojman endorses the critiques. But in the 7th edition the critiques are presented from a neutral standpoint. And what Mitchell refers to as the "spiritual dimension" problem for ABE is presented as the "spontaneous dimension" in the 7th edition.
It's plausible that these discrepancies are due to different editions of the book, where Fieser attempted to move the book in a more secular and "neutral" direction after Pojman's death (and this would explain some of the confusing switches I mentioned in my review that book)... but I don't have access to the 5th edition and can't check. If this is the case, then I still think the responsibility falls on Mitchell's shoulders to check later editions that his readers will most likely have access to and make them aware that such changes were made to later editions of the book.
April 8, 2020
In less than a hundred pages Mitchell does a fantastic job of presenting the evolution of ethics throughout the years. He starts with the Word of God and how it has impacted society after society. Then, he moves on the to Enlightenment ethics class, and he shows how moral reasoning alone fails. He also highlights relative ethics, which is held by many in today’s society. He concludes by presenting what he calls “Evangelical Ethics,” which is rooted in the Word of God. This ultimately leads to a life of blessedness that seeks to glorify God in all things. I would highly recommend this for anyone wanting an introduction to how Christians are to think about ethics.
June 7, 2018
Good (and short) book.
April 5, 2019
Great introduction into Ethics. Mitchell gives a brief but helpful sketch of the history of ethics, first from a secular and then from a Christian perspective.
June 17, 2019
This is a good and short introduction to Christian Ethics. I found it most helpful in laying a framework for thinking through Ethcis.
August 24, 2019
Excellent source! Loved his emphasis on virtue!
February 16, 2020
Good, accessible, basic intro to Christian ethics and other views.
December 6, 2013
A Brief Introduction
There is no more important subject for Christians than ethics. Although short, this book gives a good overview for both students and lay people interested in the subject.
The opening chapter treats moral relativism. For me, this is one of the most important chapters in the book. Although the manifestation of a morality can vary from culture to culture, the underlying premise doesn't. I like the author's example: giving the finger to someone in our culture may not seem the same as showing the bottom of your foot, but in their respective cultures they both indicate a lack of respect for the individual.
The book surveys the important cultural sources of ethics, predominantly the old testament and the ten commandments, and Christ's teachings in the new testament, particularly the sermon on the mount. The book also touches on enlightenment ethics, focusing on Kant, and ends with a brief summary of Evangelical ethics, focusing primarily on authors alive today. It ends with a useful chapter on how the Bible can and should be used in moral decision making.
I highly recommend this book if you're interested in ethics. It's easy to read and offers much food for thought about ethical and moral issues and the historical background. While billed as a student guide, I think anyone interested in ethics would find the book well worth reading.
I reviewed this book for Crossway Publishing.
There is no more important subject for Christians than ethics. Although short, this book gives a good overview for both students and lay people interested in the subject.
The opening chapter treats moral relativism. For me, this is one of the most important chapters in the book. Although the manifestation of a morality can vary from culture to culture, the underlying premise doesn't. I like the author's example: giving the finger to someone in our culture may not seem the same as showing the bottom of your foot, but in their respective cultures they both indicate a lack of respect for the individual.
The book surveys the important cultural sources of ethics, predominantly the old testament and the ten commandments, and Christ's teachings in the new testament, particularly the sermon on the mount. The book also touches on enlightenment ethics, focusing on Kant, and ends with a brief summary of Evangelical ethics, focusing primarily on authors alive today. It ends with a useful chapter on how the Bible can and should be used in moral decision making.
I highly recommend this book if you're interested in ethics. It's easy to read and offers much food for thought about ethical and moral issues and the historical background. While billed as a student guide, I think anyone interested in ethics would find the book well worth reading.
I reviewed this book for Crossway Publishing.
July 10, 2014
This small book is a wonderful tool, it is a part of the Reclaiming the Christian intellectual Tradition series which is designed for Christian students. Small but mighty, it demonstrates why and how every believer is called to Christ-conformed ethical reasoning. C. Ben Mitchell is very gifted in communicating complex issues in easily understood terms. It will help prepare a generation of Christians to think Christianly, to engage the academy and culture and serve the church and society.
This book is a guide to thinking about the good, and how the conduct, attitudes, and character should be oriented toward the triune God. Before reading the book I looked at all the Appendix and definitions, questions for reflection, glossary, resources for further study, general index and scripture index. Another item I was particularly impressed by was the timeline with all of the theologians and issues from Ten Commandments, Buddha, Confucius to our modern theologians like Christian Smith, everything that had to do with our developing a ethical conscious.
I can't say it was an easy book, but what a perfect guide to ethical thinking. Questions like, “Can we be good without God and his revelation”? The chapters are Challenges of a relativist world, history of moral reasoning, enlightenment ethics, Evangelical ethics and using the Bible in Moral decision making. Excellent.
This book is a guide to thinking about the good, and how the conduct, attitudes, and character should be oriented toward the triune God. Before reading the book I looked at all the Appendix and definitions, questions for reflection, glossary, resources for further study, general index and scripture index. Another item I was particularly impressed by was the timeline with all of the theologians and issues from Ten Commandments, Buddha, Confucius to our modern theologians like Christian Smith, everything that had to do with our developing a ethical conscious.
I can't say it was an easy book, but what a perfect guide to ethical thinking. Questions like, “Can we be good without God and his revelation”? The chapters are Challenges of a relativist world, history of moral reasoning, enlightenment ethics, Evangelical ethics and using the Bible in Moral decision making. Excellent.
November 26, 2013
An excellent, and explicitly Christian, introduction to the subject of ethics. Mitchell does a superb job of showing how Christian and religious ethics situates within the history of ethical thought and how an explicitly Christian ethic is superior to, especially, Enlightenment ethical theories.
For such a short book, Mitchell also does a great job of explaining how the Bible can function as a guide to ethical thought. He does a good job of pointing out some common pitfalls here.
In addition, throughout this book Mitchell mentions other thinkers and ethicists' works that one might be inspired to go on to greater depths of ethical inquiry with.
For those interested in a very quick and highly, non-technical read that introduces one to the field of Christian ethics, I cannot recommend a better book.
For such a short book, Mitchell also does a great job of explaining how the Bible can function as a guide to ethical thought. He does a good job of pointing out some common pitfalls here.
In addition, throughout this book Mitchell mentions other thinkers and ethicists' works that one might be inspired to go on to greater depths of ethical inquiry with.
For those interested in a very quick and highly, non-technical read that introduces one to the field of Christian ethics, I cannot recommend a better book.
January 23, 2014
What Mitchell presents here is more of an historical survey of ethics than modern-day application of ethics within a Christian worldview. While both the ancient and contemporary components are necessary, a book this brief could have benefitted from more balance. When applied ethics are dealt with they are done well, but while Mitchell makes cogent arguments, they are sporadically nestled between the summaries of ethicists and moral frameworks of the past. A serviceable, if lacking, introduction.
September 1, 2016
One of the weaker entries in this series. It's historical overview seems shallow and yet still manages to consume most of the book. The author's own ethical paradigm is hardly presented, let alone discussed in any depth. His examples seem repetitive. All in all, a much better effort should have been demanded by the series editors.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews