Choice Review

Innocent, unironic, pure, naive, immune from self-deception, Moore as seen by Hutchinson (Univ. of Iowa) is the reactionary defender of the objectivity of goodness against "powerful and pernicious" encroachments of philosophy on ordinary thought and "the things we know to be irreplaceable in any sane way of life." (Compare Tom Regan's Bloomsbury's Prophet, CH, May'87; Thomas Baldwin's G.E. Moore, CH, Jul'91; and Paul Levy's Moore, CH, Sep'80.) This book emphasizes Moore's view that goodness is nonnatural, subordinating the argument for its indefinability. Hutchinson sees Moore seeking epiphanies more than arguments. The Open Question Argument is about recovering "our sound ordinary understanding of good" from "philosophical obfuscation." His Moore seeks a return to "the simple truths about good and evil we all somehow know" and embraces a "conservative" perspective. Hutchinson finds paradox, though, in the necessity of engaging corruptive reflection in order to defend innocence. Affirming Moore's defense of the "love and beauty and truth we do simply know," Hutchinson pays little attention to the connection between Moore's ethical theory and his responses to epistemological skepticism. Hutchinson's Moore finds the world full of goodness, in need not of redemption but of conservative defense against redescriptive ideologues. For very advanced upper-division undergraduates and higher. J. Churchill formerly, Hendrix College