<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A Disappointed Prolifer
Review: As a prolife humanist this book really disappointed me. To keep this review quick and to the point I'll point out a major flaw in the beginning of the book. Kreeft's premise #6, "Morality is based on metaphysics", is quite flawed. The idea is that what is right is based on what something is. One of Kreeft's own examples is that the handicapped have a right to elevators because they are handicapped. Another is that it is wrong to harm dogs (a moral statement) because they feel pain (a metaphysical statement). So, something is morally right based on what is real. The problem with this line of argument should be overwhelmingly obvious: it is wrong to eat animals (a moral statment) because they can feel pain (a metaphysical statement). Now, is it "really" wrong to eat animals because of the metaphysical reality that they can feel pain when killed for food? I wonder if Kreeft is a vegetarian. Of course, many other examples abound: it is right for a man to impregnate as many women as he possibly can (a moral statement) because he can physically do so and because he has the desire to do so (a metaphysical statement). It is right to take drugs (a moral statement) because they make you feel good (a metaphysical statement). The examples can go on and on. Just because something "is" the way it "is" in nature it does not follow that we will automatically know what moral choices are "right" or "wrong." Kreeft's entire argument in the first part of his book falls apart right here (if not before). I was expecting a lot more from this book and I was very disappointed. Better books are "Prolife Answers to Prochoice Questions" by Randy Alcorn and "Abortion: Questions and Answers" by Willke. Although the books contain the obligatory (and distinctly annoying) religious messages, they also contain good, rational arguments in favor of the prolife position.
Rating:
Summary: A Disappointed Prolifer
Review: As a prolife humanist this book really disappointed me. To keep this review quick and to the point I'll point out a major flaw in the beginning of the book. Kreeft's premise #6, "Morality is based on metaphysics", is quite flawed. The idea is that what is right is based on what something is. One of Kreeft's own examples is that the handicapped have a right to elevators because they are handicapped. Another is that it is wrong to harm dogs (a moral statement) because they feel pain (a metaphysical statement). So, something is morally right based on what is real. The problem with this line of argument should be overwhelmingly obvious: it is wrong to eat animals (a moral statment) because they can feel pain (a metaphysical statement). Now, is it "really" wrong to eat animals because of the metaphysical reality that they can feel pain when killed for food? I wonder if Kreeft is a vegetarian. Of course, many other examples abound: it is right for a man to impregnate as many women as he possibly can (a moral statement) because he can physically do so and because he has the desire to do so (a metaphysical statement). It is right to take drugs (a moral statement) because they make you feel good (a metaphysical statement). The examples can go on and on. Just because something "is" the way it "is" in nature it does not follow that we will automatically know what moral choices are "right" or "wrong." Kreeft's entire argument in the first part of his book falls apart right here (if not before). I was expecting a lot more from this book and I was very disappointed. Better books are "Prolife Answers to Prochoice Questions" by Randy Alcorn and "Abortion: Questions and Answers" by Willke. Although the books contain the obligatory (and distinctly annoying) religious messages, they also contain good, rational arguments in favor of the prolife position.
Rating: 
Summary: Vintage Kreeft
Review: I have attended lectures by Kreeft and am familiar with his style. If you are familiar with the man, this book can be a joy, and at times quite funny. On the other hand, if you are not familiar with Kreeft, the book can be somewhat offensive and derogatory. Kreeft is quite narrow-minded on the issue so anyone looking for a fair appraisal of the situation should know that Kreeft is a strong Catholic and strong pro-lifer. This book is definitely not a fair and compassionate look at the subject. In light of what I have just said, I still give the book 4 stars because arrogance aside, the man does back up everything he says in a sound philosophical manner. I happen to agree with Kreeft and am pro-life, therefore the book was easy for me to read. I would imagine it would be a somewhat gut-wrenching read for a pro-choicer. But agree or disagree with the man, you have to admit that his logic is sound. He uses a step-by-step absolutist approach to reach his conclusions, and even includes a dialogue at the end of the book between a pro-lifer and pro-choicer. People on either side of the issue should read this book to re-examine their beliefs.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating, but a little misleading
Review: If there were a Peter Kreeft fan club, I'd be the president. Kreeft, a Catholic professor of philosophy at Boston College, has a brilliant command of logic. And he makes it accessible to the average reader. "Three Approaches to Abortion" is divided into three parts. The first is Kreeft's main argument, his "Apple Argument Against Abortion" which argues in 15 steps from the premise that "we know what an apple is" to the conclusion that "abortion must be outlawed." The second section is an essay by Kreeft describing 15 motivations behind the pro-life movement. The third section is a delightful (imaginary) dialogue between a pro-lifer and a pro-choicer. In it, Kreeft refutes the 15 most common pro-choice arguments. There is no doubt that "Three Approaches to Abortion" is a great read and a welcome contribution to the pro-life cause. Kreeft portrays the book as "thoughtful and compassionate" and says right in the preface that the book is meant to be read by pro-choicers. I found in this book an abundance of thoughtfulness but, unfortunately, a lack of compassion. He makes great points throughout the book -- inspiring many "Eureka!" moments in me -- but I think he lets his moral disgust with abortion get the best of him. Particularly in section 2 (which he admittedly calls a "pro-life motivational map") as well as in a brief "historical postscript" to section 1, Kreeft's logical arguments give way to polemical attacks against the "culture of death." Which I totally agree with! My only problem is that they'd probably serve to offend any pro-choicers and confuse any atheists who may read the book. It's unfortunate, because Kreeft is a great, great writer and philosopher. If you're pro-life, don't miss "Three Approaches to Abortion"! If you're pro-choice, buy the book and skip section 2.
Rating: 
Summary: Ridiculous
Review: Kreeft believes that ideas really are powerful things and he certainly proves it in this book. By using logic and with a firm grasp on language Kreeft molds an argument stronger than most others against abortion. In fact, he is still waiting for someone to refute his "apple" argument. If you want to find the logical basis of opposition to abortion, then you will find none better than within these pages. Kreeft is a masterful apologist and proves without a doubt that abortion is the greatest evil mankind has ever thrust upon itself...so far.
Rating: 
Summary: Arguments for Life
Review: This is not the first book the well-known and prolific American philosopher has written on the subject of abortion. In 1983 he wrote The Unaborted Socrates: A Dramatic Debate on the Issues Surrounding Abortion (Inter-varsity Press). Indeed, abortion featured partially in other works, such as A Refutation of Moral Relativism: Interviews With an Absolutist (Ignatius Press, 1999). But as Kreeft says, abortion continues to be "the most divisive public issue of our time". Thus another look at the subject is in order. This volume, as the title indicates, is divided into three main sections. The first offers a philosophical argument against abortion. The second affirms pro-lifers as to why the debate is important and why they must continue in the battle. The third deals with objections from the pro-abortion side. Part one of this book makes the philosophical case against abortion. Philosophical argumentation can be quite technical and convoluted, involving multiple steps, seeking the validity of an argument or the soundness of a premise. And Kreeft is a philosopher. But most people are not. Thus it is the task of Kreeft to take relatively complex concepts in logic and philosophy and make them understandable to the common reader. This he does quite well. Generally any philosophical argument takes some amount of time to elaborate. Kreeft's 15 points take some 30 pages to unfold. But the are easy to understand and flow easily one to the other. Professional philosophers may demure, saying the argument is too simplistic, makes too many assumptions, or is not carefully nuanced enough. Possibly, yes. But Kreeft does seek to cover all the bases, and he deliberately has chosen not to go down the technical path. The fifteen steps perhaps can be boiled down to several propositions:
-human rights are based on the condition of human reality (the nature of who we are)
-morality is based on higher law, or metaphysics
-metaphysics, not might, should determine morality
-morality (rights) should extend to all persons, not just some
-if we are unsure if the unborn are persons, then we should not abort them If that does not seem like much of an argument, read the 30 pages and see how he carefully weaves his case together. Part two of the book is meant to rally the troops to not give up on this vital issue. It makes clear why the debate is so important, and how it in many ways impacts of so many other crucial issues. Many areas, such as family, society, sexuality, human meaning and purpose, and even human survival, are impacted by the way we think about, and legislate on, abortion. If we give up on defending the rights of the unborn, we have given way a huge amount of moral ground. To surrender here opens up all kinds of other abuses of human rights. Part three of the book takes on many of the common objections raised by the pro-abortion camp. It comes in the form of a dialogue between Kreeft and an opponent, a format Kreeft has successfully used in many of his earlier books. Engaging, witty and intellectually cogent, the argument made provides much useful information to the pro-life side. The overall effect of these three sections is a strongly and tightly argued case for the protection of unborn life, and a refutation of many of the pro-abortion positions. While the book is written for people in both camps, one assumes it will mainly be read by like-minded thinkers. However, those on the other side who want to approach the issue with an open mind will find much to think about here, and perhaps even a few may find themselves changing their minds.
<< 1 >>
| 
