What do you think?
Rate this book
In Search of Moral Knowledge: Overcoming the Fact-Value Dichotomy
For most of the church's history, people have seen Christian ethics as normative and universally applicable. Recently, however, this view has been lost, thanks to naturalism and relativism. R. Scott Smith argues that Christians need to overcome Kant's fact-value dichotomy and recover the possibility of genuine moral and theological knowledge.
- GenresPhilosophy
366 pages, Unknown Binding
First published May 2, 2014
2 people are currently reading
47 people want to read
About the author
R. Scott Smith
23 books3 followersR. Scott Smith is Assistant Professor of Ethics and Christian Apologetics at Biola University in California. He is the author of Virtue Ethics and Moral Knowledge. Dr. Smith has lectured and presented numerous times on his specialty, postmodernism, and he is also the secretary-treasurer of the Evangelical Philosophical Society.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
February 9, 2021
Thanks to IVP for the free review copy of the book.
I find books on morality utterly fascinating, mainly because it has implications for our lives. I have recently seen the importance of metaphysical discussions, which probably have even more importance because your metaphysical views will often inform your moral ones. The main purpose of Smith's book is to show that we must overcome this idea, deeply ingrained in our social consciousness, that there is a split between fact and value. In other words, we can know reality as it really is and, it follows, that we can have true knowledge about moral facts.
Smith comes at this from the view of a substance dualist (though he says he has more Aristotelian-Thomistic leanings than Cartesian ones, making him resemble a hylomorphist more). He also argues that if naturalism is true, then we can't have any knowledge of reality at all, which also means that we shouldn't take seriously naturalistic arguments against dualism, because if we can't know reality, there is no way to know if their arguments against dualism are true.
Smith takes much time in giving a history of different moral views. It is not an exhaustive journey (e.g. he talks at length about Plato and Aristotle, but not about the Stoics or Epicureans), but again, he can't really cover everything and get what he needs done in the length of his book. He essentially covers the moral views of the most prominent philosophers of their time, from Plato and Aristotle, to Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, and others, leading up to postmodern thinkers. Aside from covering these differing moral views, Smith argues that most of these views (the ones that reject hylomorphism and Aristotelian philosophy) should be rejected as untenable. It was the denial of Aristotelianism that has led to the idea that you can't actually know reality as it really is.
Smith also closes his book not just by arguing that his view of morality should be accepted, he also gives an apologetic case for Christianity. It's a little puzzling that, as a Thomist, he would rely on some modern arguments like the KCA, Intelligent Design, and others, and not use Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways, but these are still good arguments in their own right.
If you're looking for a good discussion of the major moral views throughout history, this will be a great place to start. As I said, it's not exhaustive, but this will be a good primer for the different views of morality (and why they succeed or fail) throughout history. Smith also does a very good job in showing why the fact-value split is dangerous and should be rejected.
I find books on morality utterly fascinating, mainly because it has implications for our lives. I have recently seen the importance of metaphysical discussions, which probably have even more importance because your metaphysical views will often inform your moral ones. The main purpose of Smith's book is to show that we must overcome this idea, deeply ingrained in our social consciousness, that there is a split between fact and value. In other words, we can know reality as it really is and, it follows, that we can have true knowledge about moral facts.
Smith comes at this from the view of a substance dualist (though he says he has more Aristotelian-Thomistic leanings than Cartesian ones, making him resemble a hylomorphist more). He also argues that if naturalism is true, then we can't have any knowledge of reality at all, which also means that we shouldn't take seriously naturalistic arguments against dualism, because if we can't know reality, there is no way to know if their arguments against dualism are true.
Smith takes much time in giving a history of different moral views. It is not an exhaustive journey (e.g. he talks at length about Plato and Aristotle, but not about the Stoics or Epicureans), but again, he can't really cover everything and get what he needs done in the length of his book. He essentially covers the moral views of the most prominent philosophers of their time, from Plato and Aristotle, to Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, and others, leading up to postmodern thinkers. Aside from covering these differing moral views, Smith argues that most of these views (the ones that reject hylomorphism and Aristotelian philosophy) should be rejected as untenable. It was the denial of Aristotelianism that has led to the idea that you can't actually know reality as it really is.
Smith also closes his book not just by arguing that his view of morality should be accepted, he also gives an apologetic case for Christianity. It's a little puzzling that, as a Thomist, he would rely on some modern arguments like the KCA, Intelligent Design, and others, and not use Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways, but these are still good arguments in their own right.
If you're looking for a good discussion of the major moral views throughout history, this will be a great place to start. As I said, it's not exhaustive, but this will be a good primer for the different views of morality (and why they succeed or fail) throughout history. Smith also does a very good job in showing why the fact-value split is dangerous and should be rejected.
October 21, 2016
Summary: Surveying the history of ethical thought, it argues for the possibility of universal moral knowledge contrary to contemporary theories consigning moral propositions to the realm of subjective, relative values.
Instinctively, we know that some things are just right, and some wrong. Cold-blooded murder, rape, child abuse, and genocide are just wrong. Sacrificial love of a parent for a child, or a spouse, impartial standards of justice, and marital faithfulness are just right. Yet moral theory since Kant considers moral statements to simply be assertions of value or sentiment, as opposed to statements of fact. Moral knowledge is not possible in the same sense as scientific knowledge.
R. Scott Smith believes in the possibility of religiously based moral knowledge that may afford universal moral knowledge. But before making his case he surveys the history of ethical thought on these questions. First of all, he considers classical and early Christian ethical theories, including that of great thinkers from Augustine through Aquinas that rooted ethics in the transcendent. Following the Enlightenment and the focus on human reason, Smith traces the rise of naturalism, and the fact-value dichotomy, modern moral theories of John Rawls' political liberalism and Christine Korsgaard's constructivism. He turns to post modern theorists and the efforts of Christian ethicists, Alasdair McIntyre and Stanley Hauerwas.
In the final part of this work, Smith outlines his own argument for religiously based moral knowledge, rooted in the case for the existence of the Christian God, basing this in the cumulative case for God's existence and thus the basis for universal moral knowledge in the transcendent. The veracity of historical evidences for Christian revelation justify this as a source for moral knowledge.
I think this work offers a great survey of ethical thought that makes it a valuable text for a course in ethics in a Christian college or seminary context, or a valuable "alongside" reading for the student in a similar course in a secular context. It is thorough, extensive and carefully argued. It also reveals the conundrum of modern ethical thought in making assertions about morality absent any basis for arguing for moral facts.
Given the thoroughness of the survey, the author's statement of his own theory of universal moral knowledge seemed quite brief. He does deal with some objections, but I would have liked to seen a fuller defense of the premises of his argument, particularly because the title adverts to "overcoming the fact-value dichotomy." Adding the word "toward" would probably be more accurate. This, however, is valuable in itself as a critical survey of moral thought that may be adequate for the needs of many and lay the groundwork for further reading of more extensive treatments in other works.
Instinctively, we know that some things are just right, and some wrong. Cold-blooded murder, rape, child abuse, and genocide are just wrong. Sacrificial love of a parent for a child, or a spouse, impartial standards of justice, and marital faithfulness are just right. Yet moral theory since Kant considers moral statements to simply be assertions of value or sentiment, as opposed to statements of fact. Moral knowledge is not possible in the same sense as scientific knowledge.
R. Scott Smith believes in the possibility of religiously based moral knowledge that may afford universal moral knowledge. But before making his case he surveys the history of ethical thought on these questions. First of all, he considers classical and early Christian ethical theories, including that of great thinkers from Augustine through Aquinas that rooted ethics in the transcendent. Following the Enlightenment and the focus on human reason, Smith traces the rise of naturalism, and the fact-value dichotomy, modern moral theories of John Rawls' political liberalism and Christine Korsgaard's constructivism. He turns to post modern theorists and the efforts of Christian ethicists, Alasdair McIntyre and Stanley Hauerwas.
In the final part of this work, Smith outlines his own argument for religiously based moral knowledge, rooted in the case for the existence of the Christian God, basing this in the cumulative case for God's existence and thus the basis for universal moral knowledge in the transcendent. The veracity of historical evidences for Christian revelation justify this as a source for moral knowledge.
I think this work offers a great survey of ethical thought that makes it a valuable text for a course in ethics in a Christian college or seminary context, or a valuable "alongside" reading for the student in a similar course in a secular context. It is thorough, extensive and carefully argued. It also reveals the conundrum of modern ethical thought in making assertions about morality absent any basis for arguing for moral facts.
Given the thoroughness of the survey, the author's statement of his own theory of universal moral knowledge seemed quite brief. He does deal with some objections, but I would have liked to seen a fuller defense of the premises of his argument, particularly because the title adverts to "overcoming the fact-value dichotomy." Adding the word "toward" would probably be more accurate. This, however, is valuable in itself as a critical survey of moral thought that may be adequate for the needs of many and lay the groundwork for further reading of more extensive treatments in other works.
June 6, 2021
Throughout this book Smith argues that the current paradigms of relativism, postmodernism, and naturalism are incapable of grounding moral knowledge. According to Smith, in order for moral facts to exist moral concepts must exist. Furthermore, these moral facts can only be obtained by direct awareness. Only theism - and specifically Christian theism - satisfactorily accounts for both these points.
The book is broken down into three parts. In the first part Smith surveys different ethical approaches throughout history from Plato through the Enlightenment. But the foundation of the discussion is the emergence and impact of the fact-value split, a notion that science has been given special priority over other disciplines in the search for truth. This fact-value split ultimately calls into question the reality of moral knowledge.
In the second part of the book Smith tackles Naturalism, Relativism, and Postmodernism to see if these paradigms can account for moral knowledge. Smith's approach is to evaluate the positions of various thinkers as representatives of the respective views. Ultimately Smith finds that none of these approaches can sufficiently account for moral knowledge. Either they cannot provide a metaphysical account of the existence of moral facts or they cannot provide an account of how we have access to knowledge about such moral facts.
In the third and final part Smith brings the discussion home to Christian ethics and demonstrates how Christian theism can uniquely account for moral facts both metaphysically and epistemologically. That is, according to Smith, Christian theism can allow for the existence of concepts as abstract objects and also provide a means by which we can know moral facts through direct awareness.
Overall, this is great book. Smith's thinking is clear and persuasive. His arguments bridge the gap between academic rigor and widespread accessibility. My only regret is that this book sat on my shelf for almost four years before I read it. So if you're interested in ethics and moral philosophy, the is a book you'll want to read.
The book is broken down into three parts. In the first part Smith surveys different ethical approaches throughout history from Plato through the Enlightenment. But the foundation of the discussion is the emergence and impact of the fact-value split, a notion that science has been given special priority over other disciplines in the search for truth. This fact-value split ultimately calls into question the reality of moral knowledge.
In the second part of the book Smith tackles Naturalism, Relativism, and Postmodernism to see if these paradigms can account for moral knowledge. Smith's approach is to evaluate the positions of various thinkers as representatives of the respective views. Ultimately Smith finds that none of these approaches can sufficiently account for moral knowledge. Either they cannot provide a metaphysical account of the existence of moral facts or they cannot provide an account of how we have access to knowledge about such moral facts.
In the third and final part Smith brings the discussion home to Christian ethics and demonstrates how Christian theism can uniquely account for moral facts both metaphysically and epistemologically. That is, according to Smith, Christian theism can allow for the existence of concepts as abstract objects and also provide a means by which we can know moral facts through direct awareness.
Overall, this is great book. Smith's thinking is clear and persuasive. His arguments bridge the gap between academic rigor and widespread accessibility. My only regret is that this book sat on my shelf for almost four years before I read it. So if you're interested in ethics and moral philosophy, the is a book you'll want to read.
December 21, 2014
In sum, and as the subtitle explains, this book attempts to argue against the "fact-value dichotomy." Smith does this by giving an extensive history of ethical thought, all the way up to including various contemporary ontological and epistemological accounts of morality. The last bit of the book serves to give Smith's master argument for moral knowledge. In doing so, Smith also argues particularly for metaphysical realism, essences in morality, mind-body dualism, and the existence of God. This argument for moral knowledge is a very big and bold one.
I think Smith's book presents a very attractive and intriguing case for morality within a specifically Christian metaphysic. It offers excellent insight into many issues and arguments within historical and contemporary ethical philosophy. That being said, I fear the book attempts to do too much. Smith too often goes too quickly through arguments and opposing positions. Given the unorthodox nature of many of his positions (from the perspective of most philosophers today), I believe he should've spent much more time and effort defending these controversial views.
However, seen as an introduction to the philosophy of ethics from the Christian perspective, I think Smith's book accomplishes much. As previously stated, he does a great job of introducing many of the main problems and moves within historical and contemporary ethical theory today. And he gives great insight and helpful suggestions for answering such problems from a Christian perspective. I predict that many Christian philosophers and thinkers will use Smith's book as a reference and starting point for entering into many of these complex moral philosophical issues.
This is an excellent book and should interest any Christian who desires to theorize about the nature of ethical thought. Highly recommend!
I think Smith's book presents a very attractive and intriguing case for morality within a specifically Christian metaphysic. It offers excellent insight into many issues and arguments within historical and contemporary ethical philosophy. That being said, I fear the book attempts to do too much. Smith too often goes too quickly through arguments and opposing positions. Given the unorthodox nature of many of his positions (from the perspective of most philosophers today), I believe he should've spent much more time and effort defending these controversial views.
However, seen as an introduction to the philosophy of ethics from the Christian perspective, I think Smith's book accomplishes much. As previously stated, he does a great job of introducing many of the main problems and moves within historical and contemporary ethical theory today. And he gives great insight and helpful suggestions for answering such problems from a Christian perspective. I predict that many Christian philosophers and thinkers will use Smith's book as a reference and starting point for entering into many of these complex moral philosophical issues.
This is an excellent book and should interest any Christian who desires to theorize about the nature of ethical thought. Highly recommend!
December 23, 2014
This was a very well written book, a pleasure to read, based upon an argument that is a form of logical dilemma. I will post my review on my blog later. The author argues for a form of Moral Realism that is based on a Platonic ontology, a Thomistic anthropology, and a form of deontological understanding of biblical ordinances. A great read.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews