The Moral Sense: Library Edition

Rating:
Summary: A good mix of data and theory!
Review: 'Even criminals believe in morality, at least as they grow older. . . . When asked, at aged thirty-two, weather they would be 'very angry' if their son or daughter committed a criminal offence, over three-fourths of those men who had themselves been convicted of a crime (and often several crimes) answered yes. Even the most hardened criminals'those with at least eight convictions'agreed. They may not be very good fathers, but they don't want their sons or daughters to be very bad children.' (11)

This is quite an interesting book. It focuses on the moral sense, an idea whose heyday was coeval with the Scottish Enlightenment and the American Revolution. The central thesis of the book is that there is we have a moral sense, a sense that certain things are right and that certain things are wrong. Wilson observes that his book differs from other research in that 'many conducting this search have looked in the wrong places for the wrong things because they have sought for universal rules rather than universal dispositions.' (225) This is not so much a quest for absolute laws, as C. S. Lewis did in 'Abolition of Man,' and in 'Mere Christianity,' but it is a rather psychological-heavy inductive study ob what people actually do and say.

The book is divided in to three sections. After the overview chapter, Wilson covers different aspects of our Sentiments, focusing on Sympathy, Fairness, Self-Control, and Duty. These four areas provide a grind in which our feelings of morality are properly expressed. I found the chapter on Sympathy quite interesting, since Sympathy is the lynchpin of Adam Smith's landmark 'Theory of Moral Sentiments.' We in essence see ourselves projection into the life and situation of other suffering persons. Moreover, we head the voice of 'the man within the breast' who urges us on to good actions, which Lincoln called 'the better angels of our nature.'

The second half of the book is a study of the sources of these feeling of rightness and wrongness. The four chapters are 'The Social Animal,' families, Gender, and the Universal Aspiration. He makes the case for much of our sense of morality is rooted in evolutionary biology. Darwin will always select in favor of the people who are pro family, since that is how we will survive fitly. Moreover, we have this 'herd instinct' which binds us together into cities, poli, and bodies politic. In fact, the greatest realization that came to me was that we nee morals precisely because there are other people with whom we have to deal with, work with, and to ultimately love!

The last part is one chapter long, and it focuses on the moral sense and character. Wilson makers the point that we cannot 'prove' in a positivistic sense that there are moral standards or laws out there any better than we can prove Platonic forms. However, people do act as if there are moral standards, and the idea of morality itself is evidence.

Mr. Wilson has a soft, quite and gentle voice and tone that could double for a relaxation tape. I have heard him in person, and must say that it like the announcers at a golf match or an announcer on National Public Radio. This works to his advantage, since many of his ideas are quite controversial. This book is perfect for discussion, and ponderous thought. Now all we need is more research along these line to sharpen our picture of the moral sense.

I mentioned that the book is rather psychosocial heavy. Let me amend that by saying that there is a substantial amount of psychological data, but no psychobabble. Moreover, Mr. Wilson liberally quotes from Aristotle's 'Nichomachian Ethics' and his 'Politics,' so we have a healthy mix of both the old and the new in this book. It is quite refreshing to see someone bridge the ages, and bridge the gap between philosophy and practice, and theory and data.

The main question that vexes me is that you could not tell the difference between a people who does not have a moral sense and one who ignores his or her moral sense. The outward behavior would be the same. The only clue that we have is the lie detector, which measures biological reactions to lies. We may tell lies, but our body knows that we are lying. (106-107)

Rating:
Summary: A rarity: a book on morality worth reading
Review: Generally speaking, I have little use for books on morality. Anyone who needs to be given reasons in a book not to rape, rob or steal is someone not to be trusted. Books on morality, at best, are merely rationalizations of what all decent people believe anyway, and I fail to understand what is the point of that. But James Q. Wilson's "The Moral Sense" is a different kind of book on morality. Instead of trying to prove that murder is wrong or genocide evil, Wilson attempts to explain the origin of widespread beliefs concerning moral issues. His thesis is quite simple: morality, he argues, is based on human nature. In pursuing this goal, he makes no effort to state or justify moral rules, but seeks only to clarify what ordinary people mean when they speak about moral feelings and to explain the source of those feelings. Wilson regards this book as a continuation of the work begun by 18th century British philosophers, most notably David Hume and Adam Smith. He adds to this tradition a wealth of evidence from the biological and social sciences. The empirical examples Wilson has collected to illustrate his arguments are fascinating. "The Moral Sense" is not only the best book on morality written in the last fifty years, it also one of the best primers on the latest scientific evidence relating to human nature. For this alone, the book deserves high marks. It refutes the widely held notion that human nature is culturally malleable and that, with the right education and upbringing, the nature of man can be radically changed. Anyone who aspires to be educated and to understand what science has discovered about human beings needs to read this book. They will learn more about man and society from this book then all the text books they ever read in university courses in the social sciences.

Rating:
Summary: A rarity: a book on morality worth reading
Review: Generally speaking, I have little use for books on morality. Anyone who needs to be given reasons in a book not to rape, rob or steal is someone not to be trusted. Books on morality, at best, are merely rationalizations of what all decent people believe anyway, and I fail to understand what is the point of that. But James Q. Wilson's "The Moral Sense" is a different kind of book on morality. Instead of trying to prove that murder is wrong or genocide evil, Wilson attempts to explain the origin of widespread beliefs concerning moral issues. His thesis is quite simple: morality, he argues, is based on human nature. In pursuing this goal, he makes no effort to state or justify moral rules, but seeks only to clarify what ordinary people mean when they speak about moral feelings and to explain the source of those feelings. Wilson regards this book as a continuation of the work begun by 18th century British philosophers, most notably David Hume and Adam Smith. He adds to this tradition a wealth of evidence from the biological and social sciences. The empirical examples Wilson has collected to illustrate his arguments are fascinating. "The Moral Sense" is not only the best book on morality written in the last fifty years, it also one of the best primers on the latest scientific evidence relating to human nature. For this alone, the book deserves high marks. It refutes the widely held notion that human nature is culturally malleable and that, with the right education and upbringing, the nature of man can be radically changed. Anyone who aspires to be educated and to understand what science has discovered about human beings needs to read this book. They will learn more about man and society from this book then all the text books they ever read in university courses in the social sciences.

Rating:
Summary: Makes you think
Review: I normally wouldn't give a book that is this slow such a high rating. Some of the chapters are longer than they need to be. Despite that, Wilson's argument is so interesting that it is worth struggling through some rather difficult writing to try to understand it.

Wilson is making a very conservative argument that argues that everyone is born with an innate moral sense, but that the family is key to socializing children to express that basic human nature. He uses extensive reference materials to back up his argument. In the end, I wasn't convinced that his thesis was correct, but he made me consider possibilities and arguments that I had not contemplated in the past. Some of his arguments about women were clearly sexist, and he didn't back it up in a way that made it seem like anything more than anti-feminist rhetoric. Overall, however, some of what he said did make sense. The book made me think, which a decent philosophical essay ought to do.

If you are willing to read a book you might not agree with, and you are interested in philosophy/morality, this book is worth the effort.

Rating:
Summary: A good mix of data and theory!
Review: �Even criminals believe in morality, at least as they grow older. . . . When asked, at aged thirty-two, weather they would be �very angry� if their son or daughter committed a criminal offence, over three-fourths of those men who had themselves been convicted of a crime (and often several crimes) answered yes. Even the most hardened criminals�those with at least eight convictions�agreed. They may not be very good fathers, but they don�t want their sons or daughters to be very bad children.� (11)

This is quite an interesting book. It focuses on the moral sense, an idea whose heyday was coeval with the Scottish Enlightenment and the American Revolution. The central thesis of the book is that there is we have a moral sense, a sense that certain things are right and that certain things are wrong. Wilson observes that his book differs from other research in that �many conducting this search have looked in the wrong places for the wrong things because they have sought for universal rules rather than universal dispositions.� (225) This is not so much a quest for absolute laws, as C. S. Lewis did in �Abolition of Man,� and in �Mere Christianity,� but it is a rather psychological-heavy inductive study ob what people actually do and say.

The book is divided in to three sections. After the overview chapter, Wilson covers different aspects of our Sentiments, focusing on Sympathy, Fairness, Self-Control, and Duty. These four areas provide a grind in which our feelings of morality are properly expressed. I found the chapter on Sympathy quite interesting, since Sympathy is the lynchpin of Adam Smith�s landmark �Theory of Moral Sentiments.� We in essence see ourselves projection into the life and situation of other suffering persons. Moreover, we head the voice of �the man within the breast� who urges us on to good actions, which Lincoln called �the better angels of our nature.�

The second half of the book is a study of the sources of these feeling of rightness and wrongness. The four chapters are �The Social Animal,� families, Gender, and the Universal Aspiration. He makes the case for much of our sense of morality is rooted in evolutionary biology. Darwin will always select in favor of the people who are pro family, since that is how we will survive fitly. Moreover, we have this �herd instinct� which binds us together into cities, poli, and bodies politic. In fact, the greatest realization that came to me was that we nee morals precisely because there are other people with whom we have to deal with, work with, and to ultimately love!

The last part is one chapter long, and it focuses on the moral sense and character. Wilson makers the point that we cannot �prove� in a positivistic sense that there are moral standards or laws out there any better than we can prove Platonic forms. However, people do act as if there are moral standards, and the idea of morality itself is evidence.

Mr. Wilson has a soft, quite and gentle voice and tone that could double for a relaxation tape. I have heard him in person, and must say that it like the announcers at a golf match or an announcer on National Public Radio. This works to his advantage, since many of his ideas are quite controversial. This book is perfect for discussion, and ponderous thought. Now all we need is more research along these line to sharpen our picture of the moral sense.

I mentioned that the book is rather psychosocial heavy. Let me amend that by saying that there is a substantial amount of psychological data, but no psychobabble. Moreover, Mr. Wilson liberally quotes from Aristotle�s �Nichomachian Ethics� and his �Politics,� so we have a healthy mix of both the old and the new in this book. It is quite refreshing to see someone bridge the ages, and bridge the gap between philosophy and practice, and theory and data.

The main question that vexes me is that you could not tell the difference between a people who does not have a moral sense and one who ignores his or her moral sense. The outward behavior would be the same. The only clue that we have is the lie detector, which measures biological reactions to lies. We may tell lies, but our body knows that we are lying. (106-107)

Rating:
Summary: Wilson uses psychological studies like a drunk uses a lamp p
Review: The fatal flaw of Wilson's idea of the moral sense is that it can be used to justify why people do "bad" just as easily as why people do "good." Our innate sense to duty, self control, etc just as easily describes why Germans so willingly participated in the holocaust as why we help old ladies cross the street. In the end the book left me incredibly empty--even if we have an innate moral sense it has been selected for so weakly that it becomes generally useless when humanity needs it the most. Wilson unforunately couches too much of his argument in the culture wars of the early 1990s and constructs too many obvious straw men to make his argument useful in a broader sense.

Rating:
Summary: Discusses studies on innate beneficial behaviors.
Review: Wilson focuses on the innate senses of sympathy, fairness, self-control, and duty that rise beyond what we are simply taught. Indeed, it appears that he has zeroed in on the morality most people act upon, instead of the moral codes that we think we follow. Often these senses live side-by-side with the other hostile senses we also posess. Covers a wide range of issues, but I read it too long ago to recall any more. The other chapters focus on the sources of these sentiments: social animal, families, gender, and universal aspiration.

Rating:
Summary: Wilson uses psychological studies like a drunk uses a lamp p
Review: Wilson provides a facinating overview of our inate moral standards throughout history with the focus being on the differences and similiarities of current cultures. Equally facinating is his analysis of the differences between men and women. He pulls from famous thinkers, medicine, socialogical and psychological studies creating a very comprehensive yet readable essay. This book will leave you inspired and thoughtful for many years.

Rating:
Summary: Facinating insights to human's sense of morality and society
Review: Wilson provides a facinating overview of our inate moral standards throughout history with the focus being on the differences and similiarities of current cultures. Equally facinating is his analysis of the differences between men and women. He pulls from famous thinkers, medicine, socialogical and psychological studies creating a very comprehensive yet readable essay. This book will leave you inspired and thoughtful for many years.