Reviews for Either Kierkegaard/or Nietzsche

The average rating for Either Kierkegaard/or Nietzsche based on 2 reviews is 2 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2016-06-21 00:00:00 Gary Mcnamara This is a very good introduction to ethics for non-philosophers (like me) who would like to understand more about the topic. If it were permitted, I would probably assign this book a rating of 3.5 stars, because it falls short in some ways. One example is the perhaps too cursory treatment of possible objections and defenses of the major arguments that Graham includes. This criticism is perhaps unfair, because the book is designed as an introduction only. Still, I was left wondering, in the chapter on Kantianism, if the counterargument used to Kant's idea of universalizability--the trope of the "consistent Nazi" who would universalize his own prejudices to him-herself--might not be refuted by appeal to Kant's notion of what a world of "rational angels" would universalize. Another example is the final chapter that tries to demonstrate the salience of religion to ethics. I'm all for such explorations, and I see no reason why they shouldn't be included in an introductory account of ethics. Still, I would have liked the presentation of this idea to be a bit more (for lack of a better word, and to use a problematic word), "objective." The last chapter reads like a primer on Graham's theological writings. Again, I have no problem with including this exploration and have no problem with an introductory book that has its own normative argument. I just think Graham's commitment could have been less transparent. Still, and excellent book!

Review # 2 was written on 2011-02-05 00:00:00 Ayad Alhendy A pretty interesting book, though it is dated with a 1997 copyright. The disagreement that I would have with the author is related to the Muslim world, particularly the Arab Middle East and North Africa where the Arab Spring advanced by President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to overthrow dictators such as Mubarak in Egypt and Qadafi in Libya in favor of democracies, and the current state of war in Syria after an abortive attempt to unseat the Assad regime had the opposite effect than is advanced by Rummel's book. Democracy in those nations fostered great bloodshed, for the following reasons. Mubarak, Qadafi, and the Assad regime demanded a monopoly of force in their nations, which consisted of various Muslim sects and ethnicities and a minority Christian population. Once democracies were in place the majority Muslim population then began a program of eliminating Muslim minority sects and Christians. Thus, Rummel's view of democracy as a method of nonviolence seems to work well in the West and in those parts of the far East influenced by the West, such as Japan, Korea, and the Philippines, he needs to take a close look at the Middle East and the influence of Islam, in my opinion.