Ethics since 1900

by Mary Warnock

For this edition of her well established book, Mary Warnock has made a number of additions, in particular a discussion of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. These bring up to date a well-informed and discriminating account of the main ethical problems of the twentieth and 21st centuries.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction

144 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1966

About the author

Helen Mary Warnock, Baroness Warnock, DBE, FBA is a British philosopher of morality, education and mind, and writer on existentialism.

Reviews

[Yohanes Saputra · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm ending this book. It sure gives a good window how ethics had been in the past. The more I read it, the more it became clear to me that the theories are so obscure as to not attracting any value of anything, i.e. it's attractive for the historians.

Not to forget their project is from the start was wrong. The analysis of ethics without the shadow of metaphysics is great to the ears, but the project is underlaid with a deep focus on ethical terms as a consequence. Makes one wonder, ethics analysed like epistemology? No, that would be a boring philosophy.

*will revisit. Chapters on moral psychology and Sartrean existentialism look interesting.

[William · Rating 4 out of 5]

This history is very much a product of its time, but that is partially why it is worth reading. It gives a very interesting account of the authors discussed from a position that is both distinct from the position of those authors themselves but also from where we stand today. I found it a useful introduction into early analytic ethics, even though I take much of it with a grain of salt.

I used it mostly for its discussions of emotivism (particularly Stevenson, Ayer, and Ogden), for whom it gave me a sense of where they stood within that era's own vision of its history.

[Megan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Warnock gives a great introduction to the ethics of the 20th century in this book. Yet, the views and criticisms which she puts forward herself are hard to accept - she seems to focus, at least in the second half of the work, on criticising the philosopher's choice of words to describe their thoughts. Although words are obviously increasingly important in philosophy, she in not criticising the postulated definitions of them - but the choice of word to represent the definition. Seemingly unfounded.
Yet, the writing style, and way of introducing the reader to the key issues in modern philosophy, saves this work.

[Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short book that clearly explains some very abstruse philosophers.