prosperity and freedom.

I treat questions of right and wrong as having correct answers, at least in principle.

favored alternative moral stance. In concrete cases, it is often very difficult to discern which particular course of action is right and which is wrong.

Science is our main path to knowledge, and yet so often science tells us that we don’t know.

Reconciling the need to accommodate both skepticism and belief is one of the trickiest tasks for any philosophy.

another way: what should be the roles of reason and of faith as we move forward?

Life is complicated! That means no single value is a trump card which overwhelms all other values in all instances, and thus there is a fundamental messiness to the nature of the good. A recognition of this messiness may at first seem inconsistent with an attachment to rigid ideals of prosperity and liberty; that reconciliation will be a central issue in this book.

In short, my philosophical starting points are: “Right” and “wrong” are very real concepts which should possess great force. We should be skeptical about the powers of the individual human mind. Human life is complex and offers many different goods, not just one value that trumps all others.

Under one common view, rules are a mere fiction, a phony trick—albeit a useful one—that holds no independent force in our moral reckoning. Can we generate a coherent morality in which we respect rules and principles for their own sake?

I’m a skeptic, sure, but I’m a skeptic with a can-do temperament who realizes how paralyzing skepticism can be.

how can we use our epistemic modesty to make better choices?