Hélio Steven’s Reviews > Natural Justice > Status Update

Second half is paying off beautifully. For ppl used to thinking in terms of analytical political philosophy, Binmore's approach will certainly seem either an evasion of the "foundational moral issues", or an innovative, productive way of re-framing the discussion.

And his tone is wildly arrogant too, especially when contrasting his views with those of his opponents. He even resorts to some moronic name-calling at times. With all of that being said, the building of the book's main project is also very fascinating and has a lot to recommend it, especially with the benefit of hindsight, and so it's worth pushing through the annoyance.

Binmore's active meta-ethical moments are extremely off-putting. He makes a lot of conceptual confusion in the realism x anti-realism debate, with maybe the crassest mistake being conflating prescriptive with descriptive objectivism. But another very strong contender for top rubbish is his assertion that ethical naturalists are logically required to be relativists.