The Science of Good and Evil: Why People Cheat, Gossip, Care, Share, and Follow the Golden Rule,   ISBN:9780805077698

Customer Rating: 

well written, provocative, great rational discussion of the things we all think we know but mostly do not think clearly about.

Customer Rating: 

I was hoping for a naturalistic answer to the question "If moral inclinations simply evolved, why is anyone OBLIGATED to obey them?". I didn't get my answer. People feel lots of inclinations (hunger, desire for sex, desire for acheivement, etc.) However, if moral inclinations simply "evolved" just like all our other inclinations, then no one is under any OBLIGATION to obey them.

If you really want a solid answer to the question of what morality is and why it should be followed, check out "Relativism: Feet firmly planted in mid-air" by Greg Koukl. A solid read.

Customer Rating: 

As a firm believer in the spirituality of man I still seek answers to the hard questions. I purchased this book as a small part of this quest. I was not disappointed. Michael Shermer - a former Church of Christ (same religion of my childhood) member - provides us finely constructed arguments for the basis of morality and ethics.

While I agree with the overall premise of the book, I do question the morality statements and studies that point to relative and provisional morals. For an older view of this area, I would suggest a person may want to read the classic MERE CHRISTIANITY. Knowledge may age but wisdom never does. For a more modern view, I would suggest the recently released Fingerprints of God: The Search for the Science of Spirituality.

Even though he is an atheist (or maybe agnostic) I greatly admire the author. He is a libertarian at heart who seeks to dispel the myths of our cultural histories. However, where I see a divine source, he sees biological heritage. In the end, it doesn't matter if I agree or disagree. What matters is the book has exposed me to other realms of thought and provided a richer understanding of morality structure.

I hope you find this review helpful.

Michael L. Gooch

Customer Rating: 

It's like a unique approach to morality from the psychology (?) perspective as compared with e.g., philosopher Susan Neiman's "Moral Clarity". I agree with other reviewers that it's rather a philosophic analysis of good and evil although Shermer used 8 some changing grey points between pure good and pure evil. The whole book gave me a very strong impression that Shermer's view of morality is similar to the ancient Chinese philosophy, where things were defined by yin and yang, not absolutes like pure good and pure evil, and yin and yang were interchangeable (e.g., opposite views about 9/11). The Chinese morality is if I should say defined by their ancestors, i.e., thru evolution. Chinese never believed pure evil (Satan) or pure good (God). They can hardly believe or are not interested in (the western-type) spirituality, as Confucius put it when his student asked about things in the 'other' world, "Why bother to study things in the other (yin) world when you have not figured out many things in this (yang) world." That is probably the core source of culture conflict between the west and east.

Customer Rating: 

Shermer's book is a contribution to a theory of good and evil.
Utility theory in economics is an earlier contribution to formalizing
a notion of "good."
We now know that the traditional scalar theory of utility is unsound
(Beardon, et al, J. of Mathematical Economics, 37, 17-38, 2002) and
that utility must (in general) be a vector (Thrall, Decision Processes,
1960, Wiley, NY).
Similarly, any other formalization of "goodness-evil" must be a vector
quantity. This explains the pluralism that characterizes Shermer's
work.
It has often been a source of confusion to observe that people can be
both good AND evil. This is now explained in terms of the various
vector components one of which might be quite "positive" (strongly
"good") while another component might be quite "negative" (strongly
"bad").