Product Description

How do we raise good children? How do we make good citizens?
In defiant yet acute fashion, Stephen Law urges us to re-evaluate the
liberal tradition of thinking about morality. Tackling authoritarian
rhetoric head-on, he argues that children should learn about right and
wrong, and respect for others, but that their education should be grounded
in the hard-won values of the Enlightenment. Taking on neo-conservatives
and religious and media commentators, "The War for Children's Minds" is a
candid and controversial call for a liberal, philosophically informed
approach to raising children.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #208206 in Books
• Published on: 2007-07-01
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 198 pages

The Economist
'...a succinct and eloquent defence of liberalism'.

Times Educational Supplement
'A stirring defence of liberal values.'

Melissa Benn, The Guardian
'A passionate philosophical defence of a liberal approach to parenting and and education'.

Customer Reviews

Excellent
This is excellent. As a teacher I found this defence of the liberal approach refreshing and hard-edged. There really is no point in trying to force people to believe what you believe, but every point in helping them to work things out for themselves. The important thing is that children take the important questions of life seriously and that they reach conclusions that they genuinely believe in and would be prepared to stand up for. This is not relativism but an aproach that accepts that people are right and wrong about what they believe - but that they should be encouraged to hold well-thought out beliefs regardless of this. This book made me realise that we humans are not as bad as I thought we were, and that I really should have more faith in the capability of individuals to get to the truth.

A Book, Rich in Argument!
The War for Children's Minds contains strong philosophical arguments against those who advocate an Authoritarian approach to moral education. Stephen Law, a lecturer in philosophy at the University of London, uses his philosophical skills to reveal the fallacies in the reasoning of those who propound an Authoritarian outlook. Along with philosophy, Law draws upon scientific and historical evidence where necessary, so that all in all the book is well informed and rich in argument. I urge those who consider this book a "rant" to look more closely at the strong arguments that Law offers.

Stephen Law's new book is an interesting defence of non-relativistic liberalism. Law defends a liberal approach to moral education. What this means is that when it comes to matters of morality our children should be educated to decide on such issues for themselves using their own powers of thought and reason. The moral relativist will say that what is right is relative to an individual (or culture). But to associate Law with relativism is to misunderstand his position. Law is making a point about the nature of a child's moral education. The War for Children's Minds is not explicitly concerned with what the morally educated person does think, but rather with how one comes to think what one thinks. So Law is certainly not saying that each of us is "right" in our moral opinions. This relativistic position is notoriously self-refuting (an objection going right back to Plato), and doesn't allow for genuine moral disagreement between individuals and cultures.

Law is defending a model of education which encourages children to arrive at moral opinions through reasoning rather than the dictates of some Authority. Such "moral" Authorities might be religious leaders, such as the Pope or the Chief Rabbi. In arguing against the Authoritarian model of education, where children are simply told what to think and believe, Law is not arguing against any particular religion. Law is arguing against the educational methods of some particular religions, methods that might be shared by non-religious political or social organizations (such as Communist or Fascist parties). Clearly then, it is wrong to read The War for Children's Minds as some kind of anti-religious tirade. Law is arguing against Authoritarian-atheists as much as he is arguing against Authoritarian-religions, the key is that the target is Authoritarianism as a model of moral education.

If one is still not clear on Law's position which is both non-relativistic and not an attack on religion per se, one should consider the phenomenon of genuine Religious Liberals. Religious Liberals are those who hold religious beliefs and advocate the Liberal approach to moral education that Law is advocating. This is a group that one could praise for their model of education, i.e. the model that encourages freedom of thought. But this doesn't commit one to any of their religious beliefs, because as a non-relativist, one is free to denounce religious opinions. On the other hand, one might endorse the educational model and endorse the religious opinions. Law's point is that the educational model is certainly not inconsistent with being a non-Authoritarian religious believer.

Law, along with many, would argue, on philosophical grounds against the cogency of religious belief systems or particular religious views. But Law would certainly welcome a counter-argument from the religious believer, an argument that demonstrates the plausibility of a religious outlook, a counter-argument, the conclusion of which is reasoned rather than dictated. Such an exchange of ideas is not possible if one is educated from within an Authoritarian framework, which leaves one lacking the reasons that support beliefs which are so vital in any rational individual or society. And such an exchange is not possible if one is a relativist. We do not need to force moral opinions on our children when they are endowed with reason and rationality. We can let them decide, and if we disagree with them, they will be much better suited to defend or renounce their views; because they are views arrived at through thought, rather than Authority. If one has any concern for Truth, then the liberal approach to moral education is the more satisfying option.

Entertaining myth-busting book
Phillip Pullman says this book "Should be read by every teacher, every parent and every politician". He's right. A liberal-bashing mythology has grown up over the past couple of decades, led by social and religious conservatives who blame everything wrong with modern society on the collapse of religious authority. This is an entertaining book designed to bust these various anti-liberal myths. It argues for the importance of getting young people to think and question, even about religious matters. Law also completely demolishes the arguments of some well-known media figures in a very amusing way.