Book reviews

Book reviews

Being Good

By Simon Blackburn. Oxford University Press,Oxford, 2001, £9.99 pb, 162 pp, ISBN01–9285–377–5.

For a modest investment of £9.99 the reader willenjoy a small book with a big book feel. This hard-back book of 162 pages, three parts and 21 sectionsalso sports a number of interesting illustrations, withsources ranging from the fine arts to media imagesand cartoons, designed to add poignancy to the text(Hung Cong (‘Nick’) Ut, ‘Accidental Napalm Attack1972’, p. 6), to entertain (Matt Davies, ‘The HumanGenetic Code, Deciphered’ p. 41), but not to distractthe reader from the main task.

What is the main task of the book? Well, SimonBlackburn treats us to a history of morals from a ‘pos-sible’ postmodern perspective of cynicism and rela-tivistic pessimism. I say ‘possible’ perspective becausealthough Blackburn suspects that this may be the veryperspective from which the reader approaches thetext it is also the perspective that the book is designedto undermine. Although I suppose this does ratherbeg the question as to why a moral pessimist wouldbe tempted by such a cheerfully designed and opti-mistically titled book in the first place!

The introduction begins by acknowledging our dis-comfort, indeed resentment, of the moralist but goeson to point out that the moral environment is therewhether we believe in it or not, and like the physicalenvironment will have its effect and influence oneverything we do. The point that Blackburn makes

© Blackwell Science Ltd 2002 Nursing Philosophy, 3, pp. 273–275 273

well, and enables him to get his project off theground, is that humans are essentially valuing crea-tures and even sceptics who attempt to reject such amantle are necessarily engaged in the thing they seekto reject. So having established that we exist within avalue domain Blackburn goes on to deal with moresubstantive matters.

Part I deals with the threats to ethics, and to the listof the usual suspects (relativism, egoism and deter-minism) are added the demise of God, evolutionarytheory, unreasonable demands and false conscious-ness. In each section Blackburn first begins with theprima facie appeal of the position he is about toexplode. The use of a sympathetic and conversationalstyle appears designed to make new converts. Forexample,when discussing relativism he notes:‘Nobodyis comfortable now with the blanket colonial certaintythat just our way of doing things is right and that otherpeople need forcing into those ways’ (p. 19), and whocould disagree? However, it is not long before you aregently reminded that the purpose of the book is to bedisabused of such inclinations to relativism and one isencouraged to go on reading in the promise of some-thing with which to replace those inclinations.

In Section II we are exposed to some ethical ideas,which range from the defining parameters of thehuman lot, birth and death, to the various candidatesfor what makes the intervening time worthwhile.Pleasure, happiness and freedom each take their turnfor scrutiny, revealing how enmeshed in ethics ourlives really are.

Having rekindled some of our faith in the possibil-ity of ethics Section III sets out to establish some

274 Book Reviews

stronger foundations. Here Blackburn draws on Aristotle, on Kant and on contractarian ethics anddoes a convincing job in moving us forward with theconfidence that we have reasons (and not ‘Reasons’)for supporting our moral values, and dare I say it,reasons to help us chart our moral progress!

This is probably not a book for professionalphilosophers, although many will find it an entertain-ing read and a useful resource as a mini-history ofideas and history of ethics. Equally this is probablynot a book for absolute beginners, it is in my view abook that would suite the mature and not already toocynical reflective reader.

Simon WoodsUniversity of Manchester

A Good Death: On the Value ofDeath and Dying

By Lars Sandman. Acta UniversitatisGothoburgensis, Gothenburg, 2001, 359 pages.ISBN 91–7346–422–8.

Many years ago Roger Crisp (1987) published anarticle entitled, ‘A good death: who best to bring it?’in the first issue of the journal Bioethics. It was a contentious but enjoyably thought-provoking article,because it raised important issues in a new and inter-esting way.Among other things Crisp proposed a newmedical speciality, to be known as ‘Telostrics’, whosepractitioners would be skilled in making ‘life for theterminally ill, while it is worth living, as good as possible’. However, they would also be ready to endthe lives (for which read ‘killing’) of those for whompalliative care could offer no more assistance, andwho seriously ask for their lives to be ended.

Sandman does not refer to Crisp’s article, perhapsbecause he has not stumbled upon it, but more likely,I think, because it does not really impinge upon hisproject. His book is not a study of the ethics of pal-liative care. However, he recognizes that his discus-sion will be relevant to such care, though curiously hequalifies this recognition (in brackets) by adding ‘tothe extent that they do subscribe to ideas about agood death’, as if there might be palliative carers whowould not see palliative care at least partly in terms

of helping dying people to achieve as good a death asthey can.

Sandman’s aim is to ‘analyse different ideas abouta good death’ using three theories of value, which heconsiders to be basic in philosophical discussion:hedonistic theory, desire fulfilment theory and theobjective-list theory. He is concerned both with theevent of death, with what might make it good or bad,and with the characteristics of good dying.The largestfocus in the book is on the period of dying and inexploring issues that arise in the time leading up todeath, he enlists the help of three writers, whose viewshe discusses extensively: the French sociologistPhillipe Ariés, the American psychiatrist and thana-tologist Avery D. Weissman and the Americanphilosopher Daniel Callaghan.

In addressing questions about a good death,Sandman is principally concerned with its value forthe dying person; he is only concerned in passing withthe ways in which others are affected by that person’sdying and death. He also avoids ideas about a gooddeath that depend upon specifically religious world-views, because he is primarily interested with tryingto locate universal characteristics of a good death. Tomy mind, this is a great pity, because religious reasonsfor regarding death in general, or any specific death,as a good or a bad thing, are likely to be interestingin themselves as well as being centrally important tothe lives of a great many people. Not only that, but itseems unlikely that religious reasons for thinking ofdeath as good or bad have not had a strong influenceover the development of secular views of a gooddeath, even if, as Sandman says, he does not find them‘philosophically convincing’.

There is clearly philosophical work to be done hereand Sandman has begun to do it. However, I can’tavoid the thought that really what is needed is anempirical study or studies, aimed at determining what about dying and death makes it good and whatmakes it bad, both for individuals and for humankindas a whole. Unfortunately most of those who couldcontribute directly to such a study are beyond thegrave (I am allowing here, not only that there may be some people who have genuinely experienced‘dying’ and coming back to life, but that this couldcount as an experience of death in the midst of life).

© Blackwell Science Ltd 2002 Nursing Philosophy, 3, pp. 273–275

Book Reviews 275

Not only that, but a survey of those who are currentlyapproaching death would be fraught with moral and psychological danger. Perhaps the best way to undertake empirical research on what people valueabout life and death and about the threads of valuethat can make death and dying a positive part of life,would be to listen to the stories of those who care forthe dying and of those who sit with the dying till the end.

This is a scholarly though not an easy book. I thinkit would have been greatly enhanced by attention to

the need that all books share, for a narrative threadthat helped the reader to navigate his/her waythrough a dense text that bristles with thorny issuesthat detract at times from the main theme. It is not abook to read either in the bath or on holiday.However, anyone who wishes to be provoked intothinking about what might make his/her own death(whenever it occurs) or anyone else’s, a good or badone, would benefit from dipping into its riches.

Gavin FairbairnUniversity of Glamorgan

© Blackwell Science Ltd 2002 Nursing Philosophy, 3, pp. 273–275