The Morality of Everyday Life: Rediscovering an Ancient Alternative to the Liberal Traditionvolume 1

by Thomas Fleming

Book Overview

In TheMorality of Everyday Life, Thomas Fleming offers an alternative to the enlightened liberalism espoused by thinkers as different as Kant, Mill, Rand, and Rawls. Philosophers in the liberal... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0826215092
• ISBN13: 9780826215093
• Release Date: August 2004
• Publisher: University of Missouri Press
• Length: 280 Pages
• Weight: 1.35 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.9" x 6.2" x 9.5"

Customer Reviews

GREAT STUFF

Mr Fleming is one of the best philo-lit writer/thinkers on the scene today. His CHRONICLES magazine is must reading, especially if you are inclined to disagree with the so-called right. Over the years he has helped educate me in the true sense of the word, something for which college had no time. I heartily recommend anything he writes, and especially this, which next to Wendell Berry is the best reading material I have encountered over the past few years.

A Conservative Classic

A Conservative Classic Like many great books, this book has gone largely unnoticed by the current establishment. History, however, will correct this, I believe, as this is probably the best work in political philosophy in the last 45 years. People definitely will be reading and discussing this book 300 years from now. This book can be appreciated by both layman and academic alike, and while naturally appealing to conservatives it will also will please learned liberals and thoughtful environmentalists.

One of this years best!

Dr. Fleming's book, The Morality of Everyday Life, presents seven essays that examine, in depth and detail, the unraveling of our culture and government. What's that, you ask? What do I mean, "unraveling of our culture and government? Well, okay, take a look around. We do know, for example, that the combined various levels of government costs us half our income, that our hard-earned wages that we use to feed, house, and clothe our families is being transferred, by government fiat, to people we don't even know (not to mention the funding of certain, select corporations and fulminating academics), and countless other inane programs. Programs which are proven and utter failures, such as the $6 trillion war on poverty, environmental restrictions taken to an absurd level such as prohibiting oil exploration in a barren wasteland. Or how about the disintegration of the family and acceptance of degenerate sexual lifestyles? Or perhaps we could examine the countless times in our society when innocent people are convicted for simply protecting their homes and families. These are just a sampling of the problems Dr. Fleming seeks to explore in his book. Dr. Fleming argues that since the birth of classical liberalism in the seventeenth century, a century that gave us "universality, rationality, individualism, objectivity, and abstract idealism," Western Civilization has developed a flaw in its ethics, moral behavior, and thus in the construction of its state apparatus. He points out that the two primary political philosophies, liberalism and conservatism, have both embraced a "farsighted" or "long view" of human life. The problem, then, is that both political "positions (liberalism and conservatism)" in order to engage this farsighted, idealistic, perspective of mankind (modernity) have in the very act of "freeing themselves from the shackles of particular circumstances and traditions" introduced an ethical virus that eats away at the traditional duties and obligations of the individual while disenfranchising the very foundation of human society, the family. This sort of "one size fits all" thinking that government and society are pushing us towards is at once, both dangerous and absurd. For example: a man murders a storekeeper during a robbery. In a one size fits all society, the woman who kills her abusive husband in self defense would receive the same punishment In his essay "Hell and Other People", Fleming describes the eighteenth century and the philosophies of "Voltaire, Kant, and (later) the New England transcendentalists" as the time when the concepts of "universal brotherhood, international law, and world government reemerged." The twentieth century saw the idea of a "just state," or government that is committed to "economic equality," the idea that one is to "sacrifice private life to public good," (can you say "eminant domain"?)not to mention the onslaught of self-righteous who are constantly interfering in the private lives of citizens. S

Think Locally, Act Locally

THE MORALITY OF EVERYDAY LIFE is one of the more interesting books on ethics that I've read in a while. Thomas Fleming, a top paleconservative writer, contrasts an "ancient alternative" to the liberal tradition. The liberal tradition (growing out of Descartes, Locke and others) is characterized by certain assumptions: Individuals and governments are the central players in ethical considerations; moral behavior is a question on rational decision-making; moral principles must be applied with equal consistency to all situations. Yet the ancient (and in fact almost universal) way of looking at moral questions is different. I have different obligations to different people. My duties to family and the world are not equal. Charity, as they say, beings at home. To the liberal "citizen of the world" this is provincialism at its worst. "[T]here is a consistency of tone, a certain universal high-mindedness that is impatient with distinctions and disdainful of irrational attachments. Sentiments of loyalty, because they are not entirely rational, do not yield their secrets to analysis or measurement." [p. 103.] People who profess a love for mankind first and foremost have the tendency to be cruel to their family and friends. It's easy to justify almost anything in the name of one's love for mankind. (A point made in Paul Johnson's suggestive, if problematic book, INTELLECTUALS.) Dr. Fleming's book, as one might suggest by my brief description, is hardly rationalistic and abstract. There are plenty of examples from "everyday life" illustrating the arguments of the book. My only complaint is that I had hoped Dr. Fleming would have situated his ethical approach within the tradition advanced by writers of the Old Right. Richard Weaver and Robert Nisbet are mentioned once, and Russell Kirk not at all.