The Abolition of Man

For me, the mark of a good thinker and writer is one with whom I can meaningfully engage even if I disagree with them. This is most assuredly the case with C.S. Lewis. This highly debated work is quintessential Lewis in its wit (see the opening chapter), its encyclopedic knowledge, and its unapologetic anchor in Christian theology. When I read Lewis it feels like a bit of a dance, except that we very much switch off who leads. I step forward and say, "you are appropriating the Tao" and then he steps forward and says, "but am I wrong about eugenics?" He twirls me around with comments like: "...the modern situation permits and demands a new sexual morality: the old taboos served some real purpose in helping to preserve the species, but show more contraceptives have modified this and we can now abandon many of the taboos" (33) until I realize that he certainly does not agree that women have a choice when it comes to their own bodies.

It is important to realize that these lectures (originally commissioned by the University of Durham) were delivered in 1943, so Lewis's warnings against technological power and creation of an "artificial Tao" are easily understood. Even when he puts aside some of his more fanciful philosophical footwork, he makes statements that resonate profoundly today (and perhaps for evermore): "I am very doubtful whether history shows us one example of a man who, having stepped outside traditional morality and attained power, has used that power benevolently" (66).

It is a potent defense of natural law. I say this not because I agree with him, but because there is a lot here that rings true and has played out in the 80 years since these lectures were published. I wonder what he might think of education today, given his allowance for emotion and and magic as part of his objective truth (or, more accurately, Truth). Certainly if debates that crowd our societal stage today were conducted with the same level of knowledge and thoughtfulness, we'd likely be making more progress (defined broadly). Reading Lewis moves us away from collecting sound bytes and invites us to invest in the true realities of the human condition. show less

Lewis constructs a future of fear, dominated by a soulless elite class of ex-humans. He leads through the inexorable defeat of humanity because of careless writing in a now nearly a century old high-school text book.
The shadow of this volume looms large in our current age, far more deadly than the Green Book that inspired it.
I have read this book several times, but this reading was different. Now that I hear the words of Lewis in the mouths of nationalists, white supremacist, radicalized evangelicals and Trumpsters, I can no longer conjure warm feelings for fear Jack, without a shudder.
Another detracting element of this volume is the use of the word Tao. Lewis should have called it God. That's what he is going on about when he ascribes show more the origin of morality to the Tao.
It's amazing how much of this philosophical text has stuck in our culture. I think we ascribe more authority to C.S. here in the States than in the UK. show less

The Abolition of Man (New York: Macmillan, 1947) is unlike anything else I have read by C.S. Lewis. I am familiar with his work in apologetics and fiction. I know that vocationally his speciality was medieval English language, which is not among my interests vocationally or avocationally. I picked up The Abolition of Man presuming it to be primarily apologetic but after reading it I have concluded that is a broadly work of ethics, and particularly a critique of a change in ethics he perceived in the period shortly after World War II, a change which is continuing today.

The Abolition of Man is the published collection of the Fifteenth Riddell Memorial Lectures Lewis gave at the University of Durham. They are titled Men Without Chests, The show more Way and The Abolition of Man. In them Lewis asserts that there is a movement within society, sometimes subtle and sometimes not, sometimes incidental and unseen and other times being very intentional, with the object, either directly or inadvertently, to pull humanity away from what he considers to be its near-eternal and transcendent moorings. The vagueness of my attempt to describe as his project is that his primary intent is to alert his readers of what is going on, and then trusting them to understand how to respond to the changes in society as they recognize them.

In Men Without Chests he sets our vision on seeing a movement away from the idea that anything can be known objectively, so that everything we see and interact with, the previously objective, now becomes subjective. This is an idea that I think is particularly relevant in our time, i.e. “It may be true for you but it’s not true for me.”

In The Way he then demonstrates how there has long been a number of things that have been held as true, across both cultures and eras, and these truths have determined the values to which both individuals and their societies held to. Regarding the existence and purpose of a relatively universal moral law he writes, “It is the sole source of all value judgments. If it is rejected, all value is rejected. If any value is retained, it is retained. The effort to refute it and raise a new system of value in its place is self-contradictory.” (56)

The consequence of denying any objective and universal moral law is not good. In The Abolition of Man he writes, “My point is that those who stand outside all judgments of value cannot have any ground for preferring one of their own impulses to another except the emotional strength of that impulse.” (78) Such persons, when in positions of power within society, will be guided by their own, independent sense of rationalism, so that “Their extreme rationalism, by ‘seeing through’ all ‘rational’ motives, leaves them creatures of wholly irrational behavior.” (79) And the end result will be humankind’s inexorable self-destruction.

Lewis gave these lectures more than 60 years ago but their themes continue to resonate today. He invites us to think critically about the issues of our day and the consequences of our actions, not merely for our good, but for the greater good. For what has always been the greater good. show less

The utility of The Abolition of Man to you, the reader, is entirely dependent on your belief or lack thereof in the existence of absolute truth and a universal set of ideals. If you're an ardent moral relativist, C.S. Lewis will challenge you. If you're on the fence, Lewis will probably persuade you. If you're already convinced, like I was, you'll just be given a better argument than the one you already have for your position.

I spent most of my reading process nodding along to Lewis' arguments, continually impressed by how well he manages to logic the shit out of everything. His point about the danger of power that exists outside a universal standard of right and wrong is worth taking to heart, and I think that applies on a small scale show more as well as the major one he's referencing. It's not just about leaders controlling us, it's about us controlling our own lives, and if we allow ourselves to be ruled by instinct, caprice, or whatever, we're as good as lost.

Like the rest of Lewis' work, I found The Abolition of Man to be a far smarter way of explaining things I already believed, and I'm all about sounding smarter. show less

Perhaps one of Lewis' most prophetic books. The Abolition of Man absolutely eviscerates the garbage ideas bubbling under the progressivism of his day, and so also the aggressive progressivism which came into force in our own post-modern day.

Lewis begins observing trends in education and literary theory, but moves beyond to illustrate the danger of the ideas in question. His use of the Tao as way to communicate the radical necessity of natural law is clever, and his resolve that rationality remains critical if we're to prevent society from moral collapse, and more, the abolition of man himself.

C. S. Lewis es conocido principalmente por ser el autor de «Las Crónicas de Narnia». No obstante, también tuvo un paso muy fructífero por el ensayo. Y este título, si bien no el más célebre, era su predilecto dentro de su producción de no-ficción.

Lewis da el puntapié inicial con una crítica a un libro de texto escolar, en el que se declara que no existen las cosas sublimes, sino que los sublimes son los sentimientos que tales cosas producen en una persona. Lo reconozco, hasta aquí no le ponía demasiadas fichas al libro. No es hasta que introduce la idea de que hay cosas objetivamente buenas y verdaderas, más allá de cualquier opinión, que el libro explota. Es el Tao, «el Camino por el que transcurre el universo» y show more «el Camino que todo hombre debe pisar». De esta manera, nos va señalando cómo en toda cultura existen valores universales, como la valentía, el honor o el respeto. Es una ley natural, pero además depende de la transmisión por parte de una generación a otra. Y que siempre habrá “innovadores” que tratarán de socavar estas ideas, de hacer una nueva “moral” (que no será más que una corrupción del Tao), «esperando encontrar valores “reales” cuando han despreciado los tradicionales».

Un libro corto, pero denso. Leí la mitad, lo volví a arrancar desde el comienzo y seguramente necesitaré un par de lecturas más en el futuro. Lewis propone aquí varios puntos interesantes que van más allá de un mero descontento por el “mundo moderno” y tocan la esencia del ser humano. show less

Lewis offers a tightly constructed treatise against the abandonment of values. I appreciated his rigor and the extensive array of sources from a number of faith and philosophical traditions. I wonder if the binary of submitting to the Tao or rejecting it, living blindly, is truly the dichotomy he presents, but nonetheless there is a significant observation in the way that those who wield power, unchecked by any compass, will inevitably exploit those who they have power over.