C. S. Lewis The Abolition of Man The Paradox of Subjectivism
C. S. Lewis (1898-1963) Born in Belfast, Ireland Served in World War I arrived at the Somme on his 19th birthday Fellow and Tutor at Magdalen College, Oxford, and then Magdalene College, Cambridge
C. S. Lewis: Nonfiction The Problem of Pain (1940) The Case for Christianity (1942) Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life (1955; autobiography) The Abolition of Man (1943) Miracles: A Preliminary Study (1947, revised 1960) Reflections on the Psalms (1958) The Four Loves (1960) Mere Christianity (1952; based on radio talks of 1941 1944) English Literature in the Sixteenth Century Excluding Drama. Oxford history of English literature; Clark lectures. Studies in Words (1960) A Grief Observed (1961) The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature (1964)
C. S. Lewis: Fiction Space Trilogy Out of the Silent Planet (1938) Perelandra (aka Voyage to Venus) (1943) That Hideous Strength (1945) The Screwtape Letters (1942) The Great Divorce (1945) The Chronicles of Narnia The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (1950) Prince Caspian (1951) The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (1952) The Silver Chair (1953) The Horse and His Boy (1954) The Magician's Nephew (1955) The Last Battle (1956) Till We Have Faces (1956) "Screwtape Proposes a Toast" (1961) (an addition to The Screwtape Letters) The Dark Tower (1977)
Two Facts First, that human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in.
Natural Law Theory Morality is objective Norms are rooted in nature (including human nature) Morality follows from the nature of human beings and the nature of the world
Against: Noncognitivism Noncognitivism: Normative statements are not truth-apt; they express attitudes Murder is wrong = Murder? Boo! Generosity is a virtue = Generosity? Yeah!
Against: Subjectivism Subjectivism: Normative statements describe attitudes. Lewis: We appear to be saying something very important about something: and actually we are only saying something about our own feelings. Murder is wrong = I (or we) disapprove of murder. Generosity is a virtue = I (we) approve of generosity.
Education vs. Emotion I think Gaius and Titius* may have honestly misunderstood the pressing educational need of the moment. They see the world around them swayed by emotional propaganda they have learned from tradition that youth is sentimental and they conclude that the best thing they can do is to fortify the minds of young people against emotion. * Alexander King and Martin Ketley, The Control of Language: A Critical Approach to Reading and Writing (1939).
Education for Emotion My own experience as a teacher tells an opposite tale. For every one pupil who needs to be guarded from a weak excess of sensibility there are three who need to be awakened from the slumber of cold vulgarity. The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts. The right defence against false sentiments is to inculcate just sentiments.
Meriting Reaction Until quite modern times all teachers and even all men believed the universe to be such that certain emotional reactions on our part could be either congruous or incongruous to it believed, in fact, that objects did not merely receive, but could merit, our approval or disapproval, our reverence or our contempt.
Natural Law Murder is wrong = I (or we) should disapprove of murder = Murder merits disapproval. Generosity is a virtue = I (we) should approve of generosity = Generosity merits approval.
Educating Emotions St Augustine defines virtue as ordo amoris, the ordinate condition of the affections in which every object is accorded that kind of degree of love which is appropriate to it.
Educating Emotions Aristotle says that the aim of education is to make the pupil like and dislike what he ought.
Men without Chests We were told it all long ago by Plato. As the king governs by his executive, so Reason in man must rule the mere appetites by means of the 'spirited element'. The head rules the belly through the chest.
Plato s Divided Soul Rational element (reason): thinks Appetitive element (desire): wants Spirited element (emotion): feels
Plato s Soul
Plato s Soul
Plato s Soul
Paradox of Subjectivism The subjectivist approves of and recommends virtues But subjectivism undercuts those virtues Subjectivism is self-defeating
Paradox of Subjectivism And all the time such is the tragi-comedy of our situation we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible.
Paradox of Subjectivism You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more 'drive', or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or 'creativity'.
Paradox of Subjectivism In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.
Approval: Motivating? Subjectivism offers no reason to do the right thing or seek virtue That I approve gives you no reason to do anything I (we) approve of generosity ~ I approve of the Pittsburgh Steelers ~ I like mushrooms Why should you care?
Approval: Motivating?
Motivating?
Paradox of Subjectivism But it s worse subjectivism undercuts virtue It implies that virtue and vice are matters of taste But virtue requires delayed gratification, hard work, and self-sacrifice Why do that, if it s just a matter of taste?
Objective Values There is a set of objective, universally held moral values The Dao Critiques of them assume some to cast doubt on others
Objective Values The Dao Confucius: The Path, the Way, the right way to live Laozi (Lao Tzu): The way the universe works
Confucius
Virtues of Feeling Superior person not only knows but loves the Way. You must not only do the right thing but want to do it.
Laozi (Lao Tzu; 6th c. BCE)
Dao ineffable 1 The Dao that can be trodden is not the eternal Dao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. Nameless, it is the origin of heaven and earth. Named, it is the mother of ten thousand things.
Dao law Therefore Dao is great, Heaven is great, Earth is great, The king is also great. In the universe four are great, And the king is one of them. Humans take their law from the earth, Earth takes its law from heaven; Heaven takes its law from Dao, Dao takes its law from what it is.
Dao and De Dao the way the universe works De the power, force, virtue, nature of an individual thing Dao > De The features of the vast De Follow entirely from Dao.
Twofold character of De Active nature determines what a thing is & does. Regulating principle determines what a thing ought to be & do.
Dao and De 51 Dao produces ten thousand things, and De nourishes them. Their natures give them form, and circumstances complete them. The ten thousand things respect Dao and exalt De, Not by decree, but spontaneously.
Ethical Principles Things naturally tend toward what they ought to be and do. De flows from Dao. De also flows toward Dao.
Objective Values
Hinduism: Five Ethical Restraints Noninjury (ahimsa): Do not harm Property: Do not steal Chastity: Do not fornicate Truthfulness: Do not lie Lack of avarice: Do not covet
Buddhism: Ethical restraints Do not kill Do not steal Do not lie Do not be unchaste Do not ingest intoxicants Eliminate selfish desire
Ten Commandments Honor your parents Do not kill Do not commit adultery Do not steal Do not bear false witness Do not covet
Lewis s Laws General beneficence Do not harm, hate, etc. Be kind, generous Golden Rule Special beneficence: Love parents, children, spouse, friends, country oikophilia Duties to parents, elders, ancestors Duties to children, posterity Justice no adultery, honesty, violation of rights Good faith, veracity, mercy, magnanimity
Naturalism: Debunking? A naturalistic worldview tries to debunk these values The result: A small group, guided only by their whims (having debunked values that might have guided them), control the values and morals of the rest