The Anglican Church in Tasmania                                                             Search
	a healthy church...transformingLIFE
	Home      About      Contact us      News      Issues      Parishes      Prayer      Calendar      Youth      Resources

	May 2003				Rethinking Peter Singer: A Christian Critique by Gordon Preece (ed)
		Rethinking Peter Singer: A Christian critique reviewed by Patrick Doyle
			Peter Singer is a well-known philosopher and activist whose work in applied ethics tends to provoke controversy. He defends the environment, animal welfare, euthanasia, abortion and in some cases infanticide. His views on such interesting and difficult topics deserve to be understood and critically assessed. This volume is a welcome effort to read Singer's work critically. Gordon Preece and his colleagues from Ridley College Graham Cole, Lindsay Wilson and Andrew Sloane have produced a collection of essays comprising a 'Christian critique' of Singer's work. This title may seem to imply that there is a definitive, unified Christian approach to the difficult problems raised by Singer. Yet Christ never specifically addressed euthanasia, abortion or animal rights and there are understandings of Christianity which are substantially compatible with Peter Singer's thought. In any case, this volume offers a disparate catalogue of criticisms, some with more bite than others. The book identifies some important and deep problems with Singer's utilitarian ethics. It questions, for instance, whether utilitarianism is capable of doing justice to the power and distinctiveness of the individual point of view, whether Singer is right to say that there is no difference between killing and letting die, and whether we can make purely impartial ethical decisions all of the time. The greatest difficulty with the work, however, is that these strong points are hidden among a large number of weaker and less relevant ones. Gordon Preece's opening essay argues that Singer's thought is unthinkable and unlivable. The essay improves as Preece goes on to mount a powerful attack on Singer's abstract rationalism; alleging that it does violence to the depth and complexity of the individual's moral point of view. The absence of any clearly stated alternative approach to ethics in this book is frustrating. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that its authors would welcome a return to literalist Biblical theology to solve the complex ethical issues of our day. As Bishop Richard Holloway has argued in his book Godless Morality, trying to found a moral system on God in a pluralist society is a hopeless aim, not least because determining divine will is impossible. As Holloway says, 'it is better to leave God out of moral debate and find good human reasons for' the approach we advocate.' I'm not sure whether we will find fully convincing 'good human reasons' in Singer's work, and scattered throughout this book are some good reasons to doubt it. For these the book is well worth reading. However, those looking for ethical reasons that are more broadly justifiable in our pluralist society will have to look elsewhere. Patrick Doyle completed his BA at the University of Melbourne last year with 1st class honours in Philosophy. This review is edited from a longer one in the Melbourne Anglican.