Integrity: How Philosophy, Theology, History, and Law Illuminate Virtue and Ethics in American Political Culture

by Stephen L. Carter

Why do we care more about winning than about playing by the rules? Integrity - all of us are in favor of it, but nobody seems to know how to make sure that we get it. From presidential candidates to crusading journalists to the lords of collegiate sports, everybody promises to deliver integrity, yet all too often, the promises go unfulfilled. Stephen Carter examines why the virtue of integrity holds such sway over the American political imagination. By weaving together insights from philosophy, theology, history and law, along with examples drawn from current events and a dose of personal experience, Carter offers a vision of integrity that has implications for everything from marriage and politics to professional football. He discusses the difficulties involved in trying to legislate integrity as well as the possibilities for teaching it. As the Cleveland Plain Dealer said, "In a measured and sensible voice, Carter attempts to document some of the paradoxes and pathologies that result from pervasive ethical realism... If the modern drift into relativism has left us in a cultural and political morass, Carter suggests that the assumption of personal integrity is the way out."

Genres: Nonfiction, Philosophy, Politics, Current Affairs, Military Fiction, Leadership, Sociology

288 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1996

About the author

Stephen L. Carter is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Yale where he has taught since 1982. He has published seven critically acclaimed nonfiction books on topics ranging from affirmative action to religion and politics. His first novel, The Emperor of Ocean Park (2002), was an immediate national best seller. His latest novel is New England White (Knopf, 2007). A recipient of the NAACP Image Award for Outstanding Literature-Fiction, he lives near New Haven, Connecticut."

Also writes under the pen name A.L Shields.

Reviews

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

What I most enjoy about Stephen Carter is his ability to write plainly yet persuasively. That's amazing because he's a bona fide intellectual - a law professor - and most of the intellectual types I've read are horrible writers. But not Carter, God bless him.

I've read his first book, Reflections of an Affirmative Action Baby, and I liked it, though I did not agree with all his points. But I learned quite a bit, and enjoyed his insights. He tries his best to be evenhanded, more so than many intellectual writers (the few that write coherent sentences, at least).

Anyway, Integrity is a fine book. Carter examines the concept, explores why it's so popular in American though not always widely practiced, and even defines it. His definition requires three steps:

* "A difficult process of discerning one's deepest understanding of right and wrong." This is first, and perhaps most important. The integral individual must constantly re-examine his motives and question his beliefs, and then make up his mind that they are just and true.
* Act on what he discerns to be true. Do you believe the nation needs campaign finance reform? Then do something about it. Repeal gun control laws? Do something. Outlaw abortion? Do something. Get involved. Fight.
* "The person truly living an integral life must be willing to say that he or she is acting consistently with what he or she has decided is right." No lying, no dissembling, no spinning. The integral person must be honest and forthright about why he is doing what he is doing.

Those are Carter's three steps toward integrity. Fairly challenging. Do you meet them? Do I?

But how does this apply to real life? Carter uses this basis to examine certain elements of American society - sports, the media, politics - and determines if the institutions and people in them act with integrity.

It's quite fun, and a good book. It's also refreshing, because Carter obviously believes in right and wrong, not some wishy-washy moral relativism that says if it feels good, it must be right.

[Mike Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

First of an intended 3-book series, Carter defines integrity and gives many examples of success and failure attributed to it. The author explores marriage, politics, sports and other familiar areas in his examination. A fairly easy read that contains some thought-provoking insights.

[Christopher · Rating 2 out of 5]

There was a pretty good idea in this book, an attempt to define integrity and see how this virtue can be brought to the forefront in modern American society. From my view, Carter's fundamental error is a dependence on a revealed fundamental ethics - mainly in the form of Christian religion. I don't think his thesis or argument needs to depend on morals from a supernatural force, but Carter seems unable to step accept morality based merely on reason. Due to this his ideas are twisted to declare that tolerance is not a virtue in and of itself, but merely a practical attempt to get by until a fundamental truth is revealed to all.

This desire to defend religion in the public square also means that Carter is left saying that religion is locked-out of the public square in a way that is particularly limiting to the faithful. Seeing that confessed atheists are less trusted in government positions than any religion, this seems like a massive stretch.

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this book many years ago and hardly remember it, which is not a recommendation. It reads like an earnest and well-meaning person trying to puzzle out ethical dilemmas for himself, which is admirable but not great reading.

[Becky Shaknovich · Rating 1 out of 5]

I hate this book. It is actually quite religious and Christian-centric in nature, though it claims not to be.

[Lora Shouse · Rating 4 out of 5]

Integrity is intended to be a book about what the author calls the ‘pre-political’ virtue of integrity.

Written shortly after the spectacles of the O.J. Simpson trial and the Clarence Thomas/ Anita Hill hearings among other things, it attempts to define this virtue, show how and why it is important, and discuss some instances where people demonstrated this virtue, or not.

The author makes no bones about having a Christian bias regarding what he thinks is the origin of right and wrong. But he is also a lawyer and tries to approach the subject from a secular perspective as well so that it will be accessible to everybody. He uses examples and then offers observations on whether the people in the examples (some real-life, others hypothetical) are acting with integrity, and whether a slight change in circumstance would change whether this was so or not. He discusses integrity in areas ranging from journalism to marriage to sports to civil disobedience. He also discusses integrity in politics, whether it can be legislated, and the concept of evil.

[Tyler Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

I would probably give this book a 3.5 stars but leaned a little more towards 3 today. Solid book overall.

I really enjoyed Carters definition of integrity which was essentially, “Integrity— the integral life— as including three elements: (1) doing the hard work of discerning right from wrong; (2) acting on what one discerns, even at personal cost; and (3) stating what one is doing and why.”

The first few chapters of the book break it down and explain why each facet is so important. The main emphasis was on discerning right from wrong and how often our society does not take the time to do so.

I gave a 3 because after the initial chapters explaining the definition, Carter gives about 7-8 chapters of examples and where integrity might break down. For the most part I would say I agreed with them but they really didn’t add to his argument it was really just there. The end was still very solid.

I would probably recommend this book but tell others they really only need to read the first 4-5 chapters.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first several chapters were very well written. Then he began discussing marriage and divorce. I am not sure if I misread or misinterpreted the author, but at one point he stresses that to have a marriage of integrity is to stay married (even if it is an arranged marriage). The chapter about integrity and sports was where I completely tuned out. The whole chapter (to me) appeared to me a soap box for the author to detail what he sees as flaws with organized sports (mostly baseball and football). The ending, however, was again well written. This book was published on the mid-90s. I think I fresh look by the author and editors are needed and it could become a great book.

[Emma Richardson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very thoughtful read. Integrity is such a small word that encompasses many facets of our life. How to live your life hand in hand with integrity is one of our biggest challenges, and one I think, more should aspire to. I would be interested in reading more of his works as I tended to agree with a lot of the points he made.

[Jesse · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book sat on my shelf for a while because it is not a light read, and I wasn't entirely sure what I would find it in. Having read it, I wish I had read it much earlier, in high school perhaps, for what I have found is bits of philosophy and theology applied to life and how to live it, assuming living life involves acting with integrity. This is presented someone like a legal case before a court which is because Stephen L. Carter is a lawyer and law professor. But also a christian and as such, does not shy away from religious views and often argues with them. If you think this is a sin against the grand holy separation of church and state, you have needn't worry because he address that briefly in this book as well, why morals deriving from religion are not to be discredited in discussions just because of their origin. If that explanation is too brief for you, you can read he his earlier book, The Culture of Disbelief.

No doubt some people take offense to this book and discredit it because of it reference and use of theology which is a shame but he addresses that too.

What is awesome about this book is the case he makes for thoughtful, deliberate actions and proclaimed actions. Doing the morally correct thing after careful deliberation but not stating so or why, is not an act of integrity, he'll say.

Applying his definition of integrity to multiple subjects, he takes you through an examination of integrity in law, politics, marriage, sports and civil disobedience. His examination of marriage and divorce may no doubt touch off some emotions and in sports or politics, might have you cheering.

A pretty amazing book with some very interesting ideas. The author is not the most exciting writer in the world; he is in fact rather dry and lawyerly which is probably why his books are not more popular. If he had even just a bit of Oscar Wilde's wit, he might be a more influential thinker, and would surely be more widely known.

[Red Fox · Rating 4 out of 5]

A whole book examining integrity? But it works as Carter inspires the reader to examine what the word actually means, to consider historical examples, and to think about their own integrity.

Carter defines integrity as a 3 part test:
discern what is right and wrong
act on what you have discerned
say openly that you are acting on your understanding of right and wrong

Camus wrote that "the struggle alone toward the heights is enough to fill man's soul."

Carter does give an exemption from action if there is no hope of changing the thing that is wrong.

[Chrisanne · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brilliant masterpiece. Even better than Civility: Manners, Morals, and the Etiquette of Democracy, though they complement each other well.

It illustrates the diminishing trends in integrity--- which may not turn out to be just what you think it is. Particularly striking was his chapter on Civil Disobedience and the Civil Rights movement, Law and the Court, scholars and letters of recommendation, and his comments on the press(all of which he has some first-hand knowledge). As I have said before, his intelligence is striking and his civility would make him a good (and interesting) neighbor.

Now I wish he would write a book entitled "Tolerance".

[Lance Cahill · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had taken a break from reading this book because I didn't find most parts very insightful. However, the latter parts of the book were well-written. The book feels like it is three-parts exposition and one part prescription, which often feels like the author is making 'just so' arguments in favor of certain conduct. For example, the author's discussion of the nexus between consent and obligation is weak and ultimately ended by saying 'imagine what civil society would be like!' if obligations were merely formed via consent. The author refers to communitarian theorists in text and footnotes, but does not fully develop or articulate the communitarian theory of obligation.

But, the latter parts of the book - particularly regarding marriage, free speech, and political involvement - rescued the book in my impression. Carter is a great writer with a unique perspective on things, but I am not entirely sure whether this is his best piece.

[Alisa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really strong thought process and framework for considering how to live an integral life. Generally, though, the book has spots where he is clearly writing like the Ivy League law faculty member that he is, which creates very unwieldly examples. He also develops aside soliloquies that do not illuminate his point. Even as an attorney, I found some of it a bit dry, and while I appreciate that he was not trying to tell the reader how to lead an integral life, but simply creating a framework to consider, there were some points he missed as possible issues. Will use this framework as I develop my leadership training modules.

[Terry Jacobs · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall an excellent book with great examples and generally good logic. As he himself says in the book, a law professor writing a book on integrity is a bit of a contradiction.

His legal training in twisted logic found its way into his logic or justifications at several points. He also has a strong religious bias, the blind dictates and biases of which he justifies as integrity.

As far as books on ethics and integrity go, it is very well written, usually understandable, only occasionally dry, and puts forth many good arguments.

Worth a read if you are interested in the subject.

[Vanessa Avila · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is written on the premise that in order to be an integral person you must discern whats right, act on it, and then reflect on that action.

It gives an interesting definition on what it means to be 'íntegral'. I can't say that I agree with Carter on all levels. He talks about marriage and divorce with regards to integrity and that is where my personal beliefs vary from his.

Overall it was an ok book.

[Kathleen O'Neal · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book struck me as excellent until it began to run out of steam around the middle of the work. In particular, the author's idiosyncratic rantings about marriage and American politics in the 1990s struck me as too parochial to really do justice to the broader subject at hand. I am glad that I read the work and particularly found the author's definition of integrity to be thought-provoking. However, I think this book could have been better had it been shorter than it was.

[Amin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Changed my life and paradigms of who I am and how I see the world!

[Stephanie]

I am finding this book to be very interesting. Today you meet so few people with any personal integrity - it's scary.

[Aj · Rating 4 out of 5]

A tremendous writer. Clear and serious.

[Scott Wade · Rating 5 out of 5]

At sea

[Stephen Hallquist]

Another must read.