Review by Choice Review
Although part of this book is devoted to resolving questions about the components and conditions of a good life, the main goal is to defend the pluralistic methodology that Kekes (SUNY Albany) thinks should be employed in trying to answer those questions. He argues that absolutism must be rejected, since there is no single privileged method for approaching and resolving these questions. But Kekes also rejects relativism, instead advancing a form of pluralism in which various modes of reflection, including the scientific, historical, religious, moral, aesthetic, and subjective, all contribute something to our understanding of what makes for a good life. Having defended pluralism in the first half, Kekes then shows how these modes of reflection help to answer specific questions concerning the nature of the good life. A chapter each is devoted to topics including the meaning of life, free will and responsibility, and the relation between morality and the good life. Kekes writes in an accessible style, and this book could be profitable to upper-level undergraduates and nonprofessional philosophers with an interest in these topics. Its main contribution, however, is to the debate concerning methods suited to answer questions about the nature of the good life; it therefore will be most valuable to graduate students and philosophers. M. A. Michael Austin Peay State University
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Choice Review
