By James R. Flynn
One of many primary ethical and mental difficulties of our time is whether or not humane beliefs should be defended. lack of religion within the objectivity of ethics has inspired a feeling of hopelessness. The concept that no perfect is best than the other, humane dedication has no rational virtue over Nietzsche’s contempt for usual humans, has been accused of leaving our civilization with no self-confidence or a goal. James R. Flynn rejects makes an attempt to salvage moral objectivity as futile and counterproductive. as an alternative, he makes use of philosophical research to illustrate the relevance of common sense and proof to ethical debate. He then makes use of glossy social technology to refute racists, Social Darwinists, Nietzsche, and the meritocracy thesis of The Bell Curve. Flynn concludes that the good post-Enlightenment project—justice for all races and periods, the aid of inequality, and the abolition of privilege—retains its ethical dignity and relevance.