By Giza Lopes

From the series foreword by Graeme R. Newman: “ Lopes convincingly argues that not only have the clergy as the shepherds of Death been replaced by modern medicine’s doctors and technologies, but that the rule of law has intervened to codify the ways and rights of helping people to die. She catalogues, with fascinating case studies and detailed historical observation, the quite different ways that the United States and European countries have tackled this problem of all problems. This is an erudite book that leaves no detail untouched; relentlessly unravels the moral, judicial, and political events that arguably precede—seen and unseen—not only every assisted death but arguably every single death on earth; and shows how these events have relentlessly set the stage for the coming movement to quicken the time it takes to die.”

Santa Barbara. Praeger. 2015. 256p.

By R. M. Hare

From the cover: 'What I think about morals is up to me.' 'You can't think just what you like about moral questions.' Mr. Hare's aim is to resolve this antinomy by showing how, when thinking morally, a man can be both free and rational. Out of his earlier suggestions, in The Language of Morals, about the logical character and function of moral judgements, he de­velops an account of the main features of moral reasoning.. Topics touched upon include: 'ought' and 'can' and the problem of moral weakness; the place of imagination in moral thinking; ideals, moral and aesthetic; and the rational basis of toleration. The book ends with a more detailed practical illustration of moral reasoning, drawn from argu­ments about our attitudes toward racial conflicts.”

New York. Oxford University Pres. 1965. 230p.

By William Frankena

FROM THE PREFACE: This book is intended to introduce students and the general reader to the branch of philosophy called “ethics.” I shall try, among other things, to present some of the standard material of ethics that beginners and others should know. Idris will not, however, be a summary of what moral philosophers are agreed upon, as introductions to other subjects may be summaries of what the experts in those fields agree upon. Such a substantial body of agreement does not exist in philosophy. Nor will this be simply an introductory review of the various differing positions moral philosophers have taken, although many of these positions will be presented and discussed. My aim in this book is not just to introduce the problems and positions of moral philosophers, but also to do moral philosophy.

New Jersey. Prentice Hall. 1963. 113p.

By G. J. Warnock

From the introduction: “The aim of this essay is to provide a compendious survey of moral philosophy in English since about the beginning of the present century. Fortunately, the tale that thus falls to be told is not in outline excessively complex, and can be seen as a quite intelligible sequence of distinguishable episodes……It will be found that my critical discussions of the major doc­trines to be surveyed are (I fear) somewhat uniformly hostile; and I have brought in, in the later pages of my essay, perhaps more controversial matter than would ordinarily be looked for in a mainly expository review. But I would defend this, if I had to, as lying in the nature of the case. For the case is, I believe, that the successive orthodoxies of moral philosophy in English in the present century have been, notwithstanding the often admirable acumen of their authors, remarkably barren. Certain questions about the nature and the basis of moral judgment which have been regarded, at least in the past, as centrally important have not only not been examined in recent theories; those theories have seemed deliberately to hold that, on those questions, there is nothing whatever that can usefully be said….”

Macmillan St. Martin’s Press. 1867. 88p.