The Abolition of Man

Timeless teachings. So relevant for today's society.

Listened on audio. Whoa. I definitely need a physical copy. Absolutely bursting with provocative thought.

I will not attempt to explain this book in the review. The book says it much better than I would. Simply put, this book is Lewis' address of the meaning of values in culture. While Lewis at this point in writing is a theist, if not Christian, he does not argue from that perspective, but only examines the significance and affects on humanity of both fixed and relative values.

What I liked:
This book made me think. I had to read the first “lecture” three or four times before I started seeing the concept the details were painting. Also, I liked that Lewis gives thought to the perspective he disagrees with and gives a reasoned argument rather debunking it, as has become common today.

What I didn't like (or struggled with):
Lewis was a highly educated man in literature and language. This comes through in this book and there are Latin and Greek phrases and words that I don't know the meaning of. One can get an idea from the context, but I sometimes get stuck wanting to know.

This is a great book for provoking thought. I strive to be a person who knows what I believe and to have strong reasoning for these beliefs. This book encourages and challenges my thinking, daring me to think even more deeply than I have before. I'll take that dare.

Short review: I probably need to read this again. It is short and I was recommended it as a place to start me thinking about Natural Theology. I am pretty skeptical about natural theology and this did not really help me. I listened to it on audiobook while I was doing housework one afternoon, so I was not as engaged as it may have required. But also the basic argument seemed familiar and not completely compelling.

I understand how this relates to natural law, but in the end it seems circular and dependent upon already agreeing to the premise.

My main issue with natural law is that it seems inherently cultural and that a different culture could easily come up with different line of reasoning in natural law. And some of the historical and modern examples of natural law reasoning are frankly repulsive.

Lewis as always is helpful, but he is not directly addressing this issue and while I get his basic idea, he seems to be speaking against relativism, more than anything else. I am not a believer in relativism, just one that is skeptical of natural law.

I would appreciate any suggestions.

One of my favorite quotes:

“You cannot go on ‘explaining away' forever: you will find that you have explained explanation itself away. You cannot go on ‘seeing through' things forever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it. It is good that the window should be transparent, because the street or garden beyond it is opaque. How if you saw through the garden too? It is no use trying to ‘see through' first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To see through all things is the same as not to see.” (Lewis 81)