The Abolition of Man

Jun 12, 2013 Mike (the Paladin) rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: christian-theology

I've meant to read this for a long time. The edition of this I read had both The Great Divorce and The Abolition of Man. The Great Divorce is one of my all time favorite books, of any genre. This book is also excellent, though of a totally different type.

This book will/does require multiple readings if we want to get the most out of it. Also considering when this book was written (1943) then looking at the world today and seeing how things have progressed it could be eye opening and even a bit f...more

11 likes · like · see review

Dec 08, 2007 Allie rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: christian, postmodernity

I have so many quotes marked from this book that I might as well just memorize the entire thing. This book alone introduced me to the writings of C.S. Lewis, and I am forever indebted to perceptions. Virtue, as he defines it, is the ability to recognize what is true, good and beautiful. To be able to admit that something has value.

Difficult in our world.

How did we get to the point that recognizing the goodness or beauty in something or someone else makes us feel as though part of our own soul is...more

17 likes · like · see review

Mar 12, 2010 Tim rated it 5 of 5 stars

When things get bad, I take out the bourbon. When, as occasionally happens, time drags on and things don't get any better, I put the bourbon away and take out C. S. Lewis. His books are short, readable, and filled with an uncanny amount of wisdom. His genius, and the reason he's always been a comfort to me, lies in his ability to convince me that the world as it appears to be, the world that seems so oppressive, is not the whole story.

The lifeline of depression, the fuel from which it draws all...more

22 likes · like · see review

Jan 31, 2011 Ron rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: religion-philosophy, current_affairs

After my second reading:

"Can education influence morality?" asks the back cover blurb. Of course, the musings of an Oxford don seventy years ago could not be relevant to the current state of education in America. Or, could it? For a reader already concerned about the downward spiral of the quality of our education, this book will pour fuel on the fire.

The trends Lewis warned of in the 1940s now permeate our schools--all of them. The result may be men with unimaginable power, but no moral compa...more

7 likes · like · see review

May 23, 2009 Mark Adderley rated it 5 of 5 stars

An important criticism of the educational system in Britain and America; it makes a good companion piece with G. K. Chesterton's The Everlasting Man.

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 04, 2010 Bruce rated it 5 of 5 stars

I read this for a third time due to the inclusion of several excerpts in Ayn Rand’s Marginalia. Rand virulently hated the book and its author, and I’ve always wanted to examine more closely why, since I admire both authors. Her primary disagreement is his coupling of magic and science by claiming they both wanted to achieve power over nature, but by different means. I agree with her that this is an unjustified coupling with its implied vilification of science.

She, on the other hand, seems to for...more

3 likes · like · see review

Apr 02, 2010 Steve rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: religion, philosophy

Wow. He really gave it to 'em good.

Lewis begins with a discussion of education, contrasting what all of history's great thinkers on education (Plato, Locke, Rousseau) thought of its purpose with how it is done today. Now, emotions are trivialized, sentiments (such as patriotism, duty) "explained away," and morals made so abstract as to have nothing to do with life.

Lewis then defends Natural Law, the unanimous and universal idea of absolute morality that was brutally murdered by Kant and Nietzs...more

1 like · like · see review

Feb 03, 2010 John rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This short book is C.S. Lewis' critique of the British education system of his day. It's presented in three essays: "Men Without Chests," "The Way," and "The Abolition of Man."
I've read this book at least once previously, but I had forgotten how over my head it was. Lewis wrote for at least four audiences: 1) children; 2) the masses; 3) more intellectual readers; 4) students of literature. If I read his works directed toward the third or fourth groups, I have a hard time keeping up. This isn't a...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 24, 2010 Skylar Burris rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: christianity, philosophy, politics, education

In the Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis confronts the modern attempt to overthrow the “doctrine of objective value, the belief that certain attitudes are really true, and others really false, to the kind of thing the universe is and the kind of things we are.” As such, it is a book that should be of interest to any adherent of any traditional religion.

Though Lewis is a Christian, he does not take a specifically Christian approach in this book; instead, he uses logical and moral reasoning to attack...more In the Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis confronts the modern attempt to overthrow the “doctrine of objective value, the belief that certain attitudes are really true, and others really false, to the kind of thing the universe is and the kind of things we are.” As such, it is a book that should be of interest to any adherent of any traditional religion.

Though Lewis is a Christian, he does not take a specifically Christian approach in this book; instead, he uses logical and moral reasoning to attack moral relativism, appealing to an “objective value” he calls, for convenience, the Tao, though others may call it “Natural Law or Traditional Morality or the First Principles of Practical Reason or the First Platitudes.” He debunks two different but equally popular modern ideas: (1) that it is possible to formulate any real values outside the Tao and (2) that we do not need any value system whatsoever.

The Tao, argues Lewis, “is not one among a series of possible systems of value. 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. There has never been, and never will be, a radically new judgment of value in the history of the world. What purport to be new systems or…ideologies…all consist of fragments from the Tao itself, arbitrarily wrenched from their context in the whole and then swollen to madness in their isolation, yet still owing to the Tao and to it alone such validity as they posses.”

Lewis goes onto warn of the consequences that will follow if the Tao is denied. ”The Conditioners, then, are to choose what kind of artificial Tao they will, for their own good reasons, produce in the Human race. They are the motivators, the creators of motives. But how are they going to be motivated themselves?” Either there are absolute values, “or else we are mere nature to be kneaded and cut into new shapes for the pleasures of masters who must, by hypothesis, have no motive but their own ‘natural’ impulses. Only the Tao provides a common human law of action which can over-arch rulers and ruled alike. A dogmatic belief in objective value is necessary to the very idea of a rule which is not tyranny.”

The Abolition of Man is also a book about modern education, about the ways in which educators implant assumptions of moral relativism and anti-sentimentality into the minds of pupils, thus removing the “organ” of emotion that prompts virtuous behavior. "No justification of virtue,” writes Lewis, “will enable a man to be virtuous. Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism.”

It’s not always an easy book to follow, but it is rewarding if one is patient. The appendix, where he quotes a variety of sources from different religions and cultures to catalogue certain common values, is interesting.
(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Jul 21, 2010 Steve rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: books-of-2010

While Lewis's "tao" runs as a form of "natural law", his insights on moving with the reality of general revelation, common grace, the common "reality" that we can either fight against, or work within, are very apt and relevant. The reign of scientism and unguided froth in our culture, are properly countered by the idea of "chests" -

"The head rules the belly through the chest - the seat, as Alanus tells us, of magnanimity, of emotions organised by trained habit into stable sentiments. The Chest...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 21, 2013 Rob Kirkham rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: education, ebooks, essays, non-fiction, philosophy, read-2013

There is a natural law, there has always been a natural law, and--by George--it won't be long before the worst of Aldous Huxley's brave new world visions come to pass if we forget it! (or so claims Mr. Lewis in The Abolition of Man)

So I am working through some C.S. Lewis because I feel like he's an important cultural figure for the LDS, and this was much better than the book I read just before this (The Great Divorce). This was not a religious work, though it was undoubtedly informed by his reli...more

like · see review

Mar 27, 2013 Aubrey rated it 3 of 5 stars

CS Lewis addresses the British public in this short essay on his feelings about the removal of teaching values in the school system. The use of elegant rhetoric is superb, on par with what I would expect from such a reputable writer.

Lewis argues in favour of a set of Universal values, one that a modern education system 'shies' from teaching. He believes certain responses to the nature of man are more appropriate and just than others, and tries to merit them through examples of multiple religiou...more

like · see review

Jan 03, 2013 Daniel Slonim added it

Shelves: philosophy

This is one of my favorite books of all time. I've read it three times (if I remember right). My brother gave it to me for my seventeenth birthday, and I read it then. It was really good, but I couldn't quite understand the logical flow of his argument. This past summer I had to read it again alongside "That Hideous Strength" (the third book of his space trilogy) in preparation for a retreat with the Hillsdale College honors program. The two books (which are meant to go together) illuminated eac...more This is one of my favorite books of all time. I've read it three times (if I remember right). My brother gave it to me for my seventeenth birthday, and I read it then. It was really good, but I couldn't quite understand the logical flow of his argument. This past summer I had to read it again alongside "That Hideous Strength" (the third book of his space trilogy) in preparation for a retreat with the Hillsdale College honors program. The two books (which are meant to go together) illuminated each other brilliantly. Then I had my first semester at Hillsdale. At the end of philosophy class I had to read it again. I thought I couldn't get more out of it than I already had, but I was wrong. After reading Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Nietzche, and others, I was able to see the book in the context of the philosophical discussions that have been going on for thousands of years. Even though I had read it twice before, this third reading was the capstone of my first semester. So that's my experience with the book. Here's what you need to know:

-Lewis is a great theologian, but this is NOT a theology book. His goal is to defend what he calls "objective value": the idea that some things are good for their own sake and OUGHT to be valued regardless of how much we actually do value them. Similarly, some things are morally imperative for their own sake and not simply because they lead to other good things. He argues this brilliantly, but deliberately avoids a discussion of God. If you want to see him discuss God's relationship to moral imperatives, read the beginning of Mere Christianity, another brilliant book of his.

-The last sentence is one of my favorite sentences I've ever read. It is concise, beautiful, and sums up the entire book perfectly.

-He does an amazing job of explaining how even elementary school textbooks can have deep (and often disturbing) philosophical implications. He does this without disrespect to the authors of the book.

-This book is wonderful in itself, but if you read it, you must read his space trilogy as well. The third installment, "That Hideous Strength," says in fiction format what "Abolition" says in non-fiction format. Unlike "Abolition," "That Hideous Strength" is actually written from a Christian perspective.

-Fun Fact: The "Green Book" he discusses is actually "The Control of Language" by Martin Ketley Alec King.

(less)

1 like · like · see review

Nov 02, 2012 Marilyn rated it 4 of 5 stars

I heartily recommend that you read this book, if you have a child that is being educated. This was not an easy read. I needed to reread, to ponder, to look up the definition of a few words in order to understand what I was reading. The subtitle of the book is “reflections on education with special reference to the teaching of English in the upper forms of schools.” Although written in the 1940s, and harshly criticizing the education system then, the essays seem even more relevant to our current...more I heartily recommend that you read this book, if you have a child that is being educated. This was not an easy read. I needed to reread, to ponder, to look up the definition of a few words in order to understand what I was reading. The subtitle of the book is “reflections on education with special reference to the teaching of English in the upper forms of schools.” Although written in the 1940s, and harshly criticizing the education system then, the essays seem even more relevant to our current education of despair and fraudulent political correctness.
Lewis was prompted to write his book after receiving a textbook that promoted a valueless education. The educators deny that anything has an absolute value, such as honor or truth or beauty. The only value that can be given to a waterfall is one’s sentiment at the time. Lewis would argue that the value of the waterfall is intrinsic humility at the beauty given by the Creator. Lewis goes on to explain how discarding the values that are taught to us by our religious beliefs lead to the abolition of men as humans and turn us rather to become merely products of Nature. Or as an ancient prophet said: The natural man is an enemy to God.

Here are some of my favorite passages in the book because they seem so relevant to the society we live in:
--Telling us to obey Instinct is like telling us to obey ‘people’. People say different things; so do instincts.
--If nothing is self-evident, nothing can be proved. Similarly if nothing is obligatory for its own sake, nothing is obligatory at all.
--In reality, of course, if any one age really attains, by eugenics and scientific education, the power to make its descendants what it pleases, all men who live after it are the patients of that power. They are weaker, not stronger.
--Plato would have every infant ‘a bastard nursed in a bureau’, and Elyot would have the boy see no men before the age of seven and, after that, no women, and how Locke wants children to have leaky shoes and no turn for poetry—we may well thank the beneficent obstinacy of real mothers, real nurses, and (above all) real children for preserving the human race in such sanity as it still possesses.
--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.

Lewis is giving us a warning: Hold true to the value that religion gives you or you will abolish man as a human and he will be a mere animal. His final thoughts:
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.

(less)

1 like · like · see review

Oct 15, 2012 Ryan rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: religion

This book is a clear example that in many ways CS Lewis a great author. He knows how to use rhetoric and clever turn of phrase to make a very interesting book to read. He also has some very good insight in many areas. He's right that expressivism is very deeply wrong and does not accord with our traditional language and conceptions of the world. He's right that the ethical impulse cannot be a matter of pure reason, and is a complicated thing to tie in to the workings of the world. It can't be se...more This book is a clear example that in many ways CS Lewis a great author. He knows how to use rhetoric and clever turn of phrase to make a very interesting book to read. He also has some very good insight in many areas. He's right that expressivism is very deeply wrong and does not accord with our traditional language and conceptions of the world. He's right that the ethical impulse cannot be a matter of pure reason, and is a complicated thing to tie in to the workings of the world. It can't be sensibly reduced into an impulse like any other impulse or an artifact of the purest rationalism like the other abstractions while maintaining it's essential nature.

The reason I don't give this book 4 stars though is because CS Lewis is frustrating. He's not given to the explicit syllogism or detailed explanation or real intuition. Where I think a better author would feel the need to reason things out explicitly and intuitively, CS Lewis seems to instead rely on more figurative language, so his chapter on the abolition of man involves various twistings of the meaning of "nature" and plain bizarrenesses in his interpretation of "man's power over nature", in trying to stretch a difference between technology and personal ability. By similar reasoning one must also argue that wealth is not a form of power because it only involves convincing people and is not tied to any innate ability or coercion. And to force this into only being "certain men" also carries within it a large amount of absurdity, but this absurdity is essential to CS Lewis's reasoning on the matter making it all the worse. I mean, the last chapter was full of folly, even if there is a bit of truth in what Lewis says, somebody needs to go back through and make the arguments more explicit and tie them back to intuition/sense. Also, while attempting to speak for all times, he seems really to speak more for his time, so he acts as if "omnicompetent states" are a timeless notion to struggle against, but they really weren't.

I end up finding myself with some degree of doubt towards CS Lewis's framework as well. In talking about the Tao, he claims to speak for the nature of moral authority, so he says "Those who understand the Tao and who have been led by that spirit can modify it in directions which the spirit itself demands." I get the feeling that CS Lewis isn't talking about any real ethical dialectic, but rather that he himself is the blinded one who is ignoring a larger world to maintain his moderate conservatism, and that his love of tradition is in part what is leading him astray. I don't even think it even necessarily follows that what is said is meaningless, so when JS Mill puts forward the idea of Utilitarianism, he is standing outside of the ethical tradition and narrowing it down to an absurdity, but what he says has value just the same and sharpens how people can think about their problems. When Rawls talks about social justice, what he says is very rich and very deep and even penetrating in many ways in a manner where it can be recognized by others, even those disposed to be hostile to him, but he's still lost in many features and his efforts carry an absurdity upon them as noted by Irving Kristol in how his ethic is the only one in history to have made equality the only virtue of a society. Also, when CS Lewis brings up Jesus, I actually think that CS Lewis has out of bias introduced an outsider to his Tao, for Jesus is less of a maintainer of a tradition and more of a radical who overturned these traditions. When Christ talked about the two commandments being to love God and love your neighbor: "Mat 22:37-39 And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. (38) This is the great and first commandment. (39) And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself." he is committing a gross reduction, and when Jesus involves his martyrism, he is once again degrading the common moral impulse into a suicidal extremism. There are some mitigating impulses within the doctrines, but the radicalism is apparent and it's that germ that has led to so many pacifistic and radical movements within Christianity, yet this is dismissed to include Christianity in the "Tao". And when Nietzsche revolted against "slave morality", or even when Ayn Rand did the same to "altruism", the effort isn't a matter of pure revolution, but rather a counter-revolution to sickness. In short, I feel odd in affirming anything like "the Tao", because while I am fine with realities that are difficult to reduce, I get the feeling that Lewis really wants something irreducible in principle which... I don't think can happen, but I definitely get the feeling that whatever "the Tao" is, it has escaped Lewis in certain areas.(As it might with us all??) I also strongly feel that his average reader is likely alienated from whatever "the Tao" would happen to be as well, as it's no love of traditional morality or balance that would lead a person to believe in a wholly good author of evil(that they may try to mask in various ways), a being that damns those who struggle like the rest of us for what they merely believe, or a standard so absurdly extreme that basically nothing could ever live up to it. All of those traits sound so radical that they sound like his characterization of an ideology by Lewis's own characterization: "So far from being able to harmonize discrepancies in its letter by penetrating into its spirit, he merely snatches at some one precept, on which the accidents of time and place happened to rivet to his attention, and then rides it to death", and yet that is what Christianity ends up being in many ways, as it takes the idea of human failing and then rides it to death with absurdities of hell and substitutionary doctrines following from it, it takes humility and rides it to death and ignores or tries to debunk healthy notions of pride, and so on and so forth. Maybe it avoids all of the absurdities of a Marxism of the sort that Lewis is trying to debunk, but it's not the inheritor of all of our ethical precepts or the best explanation for them.

(Also, for any stranger reading, I think this is mostly a vague rant inspired by the book. Don't take it too seriously.)(less)

like · see review

Jul 15, 2012 Gregory Ambrose rated it 5 of 5 stars

Lewis' reasoning and use of logic is impeccable. While he can be a bit wordy at times, he does his best to convey his thoughts to the reader as clearly as possible. Without going into too much detail, Lewis describes the battle between man and nature. He says that every one of man's advances on nature on not quite victories, but tactical retreats by nature herself. It is only by succumbing to nature we can understand it, and we mistakenly believe that having knowledge of nature lets us dominate...more

like · see review

Jul 10, 2012 Brittany Petruzzi rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction, philosophy, theology

“Men without chests” is an odd phrase, to be sure, but when you stop a moment to ponder it, its meaning becomes clear. Men without chests are men without magnanimity. They are heartless, soulless men who cannot even ennoble the smallest of things. They cannot do this because nobility is not only doing what is necessary, but doing what is good. But as Lewis tells us in The Abolition of Man, with a subjectivist worldview, neither what is right nor what is good have any bearing on what is done.

Mark...more

like · see review

May 20, 2012 Stuart Yoder rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book had been on my 'to read' list for a number of years, but hearing a podcast by Fr. Hopko on the book is what moved it to the top of my list. Here is a link to the podcast:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/hopk...

The book consists of 3 short essays and is about the erosion of absolute truth in our modern world.

It starts with a critique of the textbook "The Control of Language: A Critical Approach to Reading and Writing" (1939) by Alex King and Martin Ketley, who say that all judgments are...more

like · see review

May 18, 2012 Carol Apple rated it 5 of 5 stars

The message of The Abolition of Man is deep, foundational, and arguably desperately important, but you might have to read it a couple of times to grasp the full implications. At least, I did. It’s not that the book is at all dry or boring. And it is short. Whether you get the message fully on your first reading or not, Lewis writing is always flowing, cogent, warm, entertaining, and full of clear examples. The subject is no less than what it means to be a human being and how our choices and beli...more The message of The Abolition of Man is deep, foundational, and arguably desperately important, but you might have to read it a couple of times to grasp the full implications. At least, I did. It’s not that the book is at all dry or boring. And it is short. Whether you get the message fully on your first reading or not, Lewis writing is always flowing, cogent, warm, entertaining, and full of clear examples. The subject is no less than what it means to be a human being and how our choices and beliefs can destroy or “abolish” our own humanity and possibly that of our children and descendants.

Central to C.S. Lewis case is the concept of a natural moral law, a sense of what is good and what is bad than all humans have always sensed or known throughout human history. Different cultures have different names for this, but Lewis adopts the Chinese word Tao to describe the universal moral law to which human nature is subject. Originating with the ancient philosopher Laozi, Tao means “doctrine” or “principle” and is used to describe the essential pattern of the universe, the “eternal nameless,” the self-referential bottom-line truth that undergirds and circumscribes reality but cannot be justified or explained by anything but itself.

Lewis’ primary point is that if there is a Tao or universal moral law, and if humans are designed to live according to its dictates, then we as a species can get ourselves into really big trouble if we disregard it, especially on a systematic level, such as in the education of children. To separate ourselves from the Tao would be like a branch that decides to separate itself from the tree. The branch might initially feel ecstatic with its newfound freedom but is destined to soon wither and die.

Like the tree, the Tao is the generator of life, the roots, and the gateway through which we access the very source of what we are as a species . In this book, Lewis makes the case that modern humanity is in the process of consciously or unconsciously separating itself from this source of life and purpose. When we decide to operate outside of the Tao or attempt to modify it to better suit our desires or teach our children that is not important, the potential consequences are that we and future generations could lose our ability to make moral choices – in other words, lose access to the Tao, the inner sense of right and wrong, good and bad. Since the ability to make moral choices is at the heart of what makes us human, the loss of such ability would mean…. well….the abolition of humanity as we know it.

More about this book at: http://www.carolsnotes.net/2012/05/th...(less)

like · see review

Jul 29, 2011 Nicole added it

It should be stated that I do find Lewis to be extraordinarily talented and an intellectual. However, I am not won over by his argument for universal morality. With Mere Christianity, I find that there are jumps in his arguments between the metaphors and the ideas. There is something missing in the linkage between ideas.
I also found the first part to be a very extended metaphor. I might be reading too much into this. If it is alone a critique on education, I understand the parts of the critique...more

like · see review

Jul 14, 2011 Heidi rated it 2 of 5 stars

Recommended to Heidi by: Paradigm High School

Shelves: teaching-school

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. As I mentioned in one of my status updates I am required to read this for my job. As I find this type of reading difficult (because of my wandering mind) I want to review and place my thoughts as I go along. This will also be helpful because in August when I need to recall what I read I can pull up this review and see my thoughts.

C.S. Lewis entitles this work "The Abolition of Man OR Reflections on education with special reference to the teaching of English in upper forms of schools". Right the...more As I mentioned in one of my status updates I am required to read this for my job. As I find this type of reading difficult (because of my wandering mind) I want to review and place my thoughts as I go along. This will also be helpful because in August when I need to recall what I read I can pull up this review and see my thoughts.

C.S. Lewis entitles this work "The Abolition of Man OR Reflections on education with special reference to the teaching of English in upper forms of schools". Right there my mind says, "What is an upper for of school?" Is Paradigm considered an upper form of school? What is it exactly that administration wants me to get out of this book?

The first chapter is "Men Without Chests". I have through the reading of this book decided that chests loosely refers to what I would consider hearts. He begins by saying that he does not want to publicly abuse a certain textbook maker but he can't be silent on what they are actually doing. It seems that these makers of textbooks have (whether on purpose or not) sought to remove the idea of feelings, or the importance of feelings. In the removing of the importance of these feelings it is "Another little portion of the human heritage has been quietly taken from them before they were old enough to understand (11)." He tries to decide whether the imprinting of the idea that feelings are irrelevant has been on purpose or not, then decides that isn't the point. He decides "They see the world around them swayed by emotional propaganda- they have learned from tradition that you is sentimental-and they conclude that the best thing they can do is to fortify the minds of young people against emotion. (13)." C.S. Lewis then states that the task of a teacher "is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts." (13) I took this to mean the desert of the mind that is lacking in imagination.
He then begins to speak of virtue, and how as Aristotle put it "the aim of education is to make the pupil like and dislike what he ought. (14)." Isn't this the same as propaganda? In the idea of not allowing the students to decide what is virtuous or what is emotional or rational aren't we taking away part of thier belief structure? Is that the point of education? Tao is "the doctrine of objective value, the beliefe that certain attitudes are really true, and others really false, to the kind of thing the universe is and the kind of things we are. (18)" It is this idea of Tao that he deems is important. All the values of the universe come back to this universal idea of Tao.

Chapter 2 is The Way. It outlines the difference between Instinct and Tao (values). Our Instinct cannot be relied upon in the same way. People look at Instincts differently than Tao. The Tao is "the sole source of all value judgements. If it is rejected, all value is rejected. If any value is retained, it is retained. (43)" It is only from inside the Tao itself can people be able to modify values and enlightenment. The Tao cannot be created or destroyed, it merely is.

Chapter 3 is "The Abolition of Man". Here he continues his discussion of the conquest of Man over Nature, or the conquest of Nature by Man. He claims that "Man's power over Nature turns out to be power excersised by some men over other men with Nature as its instrument. I will agree with this because I do not think that we can truely control Nature. There are different parts to it in all of us, but as far as actual control... it only leads to tyrants and slaves. He makes a point that I really liked on page 57 in which he states that contraceptives and the control over the births (I thought about pre-natal genetics here and the knowledge of diseases, changing of eye color and hair color and even sexuality) "by eugenics and scientific education, the power to make its decendents what it pleases, all men who live after it are the patients of that power. They are weaker, not stronger." I agree with this. As we gain more scientific knowledge I feel that humanity is getting weaker. We are not following the Tao and we are allowing Nature to break us. He claims on page 59 that "Human nature will be the last part of Nature to surrender to Man. The battle will then be won." I can agree with that. As long as there are still mysteries contained in the minds of men there will still be battles to fight.
"It is the function of the Conditioners to control, not to obey...They know how to produce conscuence nd decide what kind of conscience they will produce." (61) Is this not the media? The education system? Hollywood? Aren't we allowing people outside of our lives who we most likely have never met to decide our morals and values for us? People who are motivated soley by their own pleasure? (65) Oh yes, I agree with C.S. Lewis on this. He claims we reduce things to Nature in order to conquer them, as if the knowledge we have about them allows us to have more power over them. In this I think it is a true way to destroy the beauty of things. Upon reading the Bible people no longer look for miracles or angels in the same way because science and "The Conditioners" have explained it away. Why can't we have science and miracles?

C.S. Lewis' final comments really summarize his ideas. "But you cannot go on 'explaining away' for ever: 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." (81)

I did not read the appendix.

All in all it wasn't horrid. I was able to get through it with only a mild headache. I haven't read much C.S. Lewis and I'm not the biggest fan of philosophy. However, recommended for those who like philosophy and morality and feel the world is sliding into too much "Nature". (less)

1 like · like · see review

Dec 16, 2012 Zach Vaughn rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction, philosophy

It’s been several years since I read anything by Lewis (last thing was "The Screwtape Letters," which were highly enjoyable), so I was pleased reading his discussion of the need for universally objective values. These are questions I have not considered for some time, at least since I read Rand’s "Virtue of Selfishness," and not seriously considered in many years as my thought has become more focused on the practical and pragmatic ends of my job in politics.

At one time, my attitude certainly ref...more

like · see review

Aug 22, 2011 Alex rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This book is hard to understand but I think I got it. Barely. At least I understood the general point if not some of the finer ones.

Basically, in this book Lewis explains why he thinks the tract man is progressing on will eventually abolish man. He does not mean that literally. What he means is that what makes a man a man (essentially the ability to have emotions, sentiments, and value judgments) will be lost if man continues to believe that everything can be reduced to naturalism.

What I think...more

like · see review

Jul 12, 2011 Jay Miklovic rated it 4 of 5 stars

I really enjoyed reading this book, it engaged my mind in ways my mind has never been engaged. I imagine that this book is more than worthy of five stars, and maybe some day I will come back to it again and give it the fifth star. I must say that there were a number of times when I absolutely struggled to understand what Lewis was getting at, especially in the first 20 pages or so. However as I read on things seemed to come together more and more.

I loved the essay "men without chests" which affi...more I really enjoyed reading this book, it engaged my mind in ways my mind has never been engaged. I imagine that this book is more than worthy of five stars, and maybe some day I will come back to it again and give it the fifth star. I must say that there were a number of times when I absolutely struggled to understand what Lewis was getting at, especially in the first 20 pages or so. However as I read on things seemed to come together more and more.

I loved the essay "men without chests" which affirmed that the education that was emerging in Lewis's time was an attempt to create people that were driven entirely by instinct and intellect and not by emotion. Lewis places instinct in the stomach, and intellect in the head, and claims that to create someone driven purely by mind and instinct is to create a man with no chest, or no heart. It seems to me that Lewis claims that the instinct and the intellect can only communicate through the subjective emotion, and that to eliminate subjective emotion altogether both destroys the instinct and the intellect. The more I reflect on this book (i just finished it 10 minutes ago) the more fascinating it becomes.

Lewis realizing that the subjective must be bound to something objective refers to what he labels 'the tao'. For Lewis the 'tao' is a generalization of some sort of value system that simply exists. The values of his 'tao' are not necessarily absolute values or essential truths, but the existence of the system is the absolute. In other words, that some moral, natural, or spiritual code exists is objective... what that code is or contains is left on the table for debate.

This book is not a Christian apologetic, it is a book about education and the logical conclusions of what the education of his time would eventually produce. Anyway it was a good book, a difficult book, but an enjoyable read nonetheless. If you are looking at this book to be a defense of faith like 'mere Christianity' or even a spiritual allegory like 'the great divorce' you will be sadly disappointed. Yet if you are looking to engage your mind, and an exercise in thought you will find this to be a pleasure to read.

For those reading this who have already read the book, I am glad I didn't write "The Green Book", I'd be feeling really dumb right now.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Mar 15, 2013 David Sarkies rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Teachers and Students of English

Recommended to David by: Tim Earl

Shelves: philosophy

This may be a small book but it is a pretty intense book. It is one of those small books that can actually take a lot of energy out of you by reading it. Fortunately this is the third time I have read it so it is nowhere near as bad as it was the first time. However I think that some of the things that C.S. Lewis has to say are very important.
Anyway, the term Abolition of Man refers to his essay (which is actually a collection of three lectures) about the descent of man from the pinnacle of cr...more This may be a small book but it is a pretty intense book. It is one of those small books that can actually take a lot of energy out of you by reading it. Fortunately this is the third time I have read it so it is nowhere near as bad as it was the first time. However I think that some of the things that C.S. Lewis has to say are very important.
Anyway, the term Abolition of Man refers to his essay (which is actually a collection of three lectures) about the descent of man from the pinnacle of creation to become little more than, what he says, trousered apes, namely animals that wear clothes. The reason for this argument is due to an English text book that was recently released, and while he owes the writers no ill will, it is the contents of the text-book that to him are appaulling.
First he refers to a reference at the beginning of the book to a poem by Colleridge where one of the watchers of a waterfall says that it is sublime and the other says that it is pretty. The writers of the book argue from a post-modern, relativistic point of view saying that the person who says that the waterfall is sublime, is saying it because he believes that it is sublime. Lewis does not think so, and believes that what Colleridge is suggesting is that one of the speakers is using the more appropriate term, and to Lewis, the one who uses the word pretty, while not incorrect, suggests that there are better words to use instead.
The second thing that Lewis points out in the book is an add for a Carribean Cruise, and the writers use this add as a demonstration of metaphor. Lewis is appauled, particularly since this book is written for people in the upper levels of school. Lewis believes that there are so many better forms of literature to outline metaphor than to simply use an add. Personally, I totally agree, and I guess this is Lewis bemoaning the state of modern English education. However, the problem here is that little has changed, and in fact things are probably getting a lot worse.
In a sense what Lewis is bemoaning is that he sees the education system drifting away from the ideas that were brought forward in the enlightenment, to the point where people have stopped thinking (not that the majority of the population ever did) and humans no longer consider themselves humans, but rather a byproduct of millions of years of evolution. It is not that Lewis discredits evolution, it is just that he sees more with regards to humans than simply a hairless ape.
This is not the idea, though is related to, with what I see here in Bangkok as I wonder around the streets at night. In effect it is the commodification of humanity. People cease to be people and simply become a comity. This is something that Marx moaned about in the Estrangement of Labour. Humans cease to be unique and begin to be based upon how productive they are, and the mechanisation of production means that what we produce ceases to be a part of us (as it was in the cottage industry, and also to an extent what you still see in the stalls that litter the streets of Bangkok).
While one may try to remind people that they are still humans, sometimes the situation that they have fallen into is so deep and so entangled that there is no why for them to escape. This is probably why there was a cry from a person at a church that I went to once that Thailand needs many more workers. Humanity has become a commodity, and all that we are being taught at the moment is how to be more of a commodity and not a human being.(less)

like · see review

Jul 22, 2012 Joshua added it Recommends it for: Anyone

I've heard a lot about this book and finally got around to reading it.

I enjoyed the book and it was a quick read. Thoughts I'm left with: Do we laugh at honor today? Duty? Do we take serious the self-disciplined person or do we pity them? Do we praise the person who indulges in what makes them happy? Do we say good job when a man's instincts are discovered and fulfilled -do we congratulate each other when we come to terms with our own "instincts"? Do we celebrate self-gratification or self-disci...more I've heard a lot about this book and finally got around to reading it.

I enjoyed the book and it was a quick read. Thoughts I'm left with: Do we laugh at honor today? Duty? Do we take serious the self-disciplined person or do we pity them? Do we praise the person who indulges in what makes them happy? Do we say good job when a man's instincts are discovered and fulfilled -do we congratulate each other when we come to terms with our own "instincts"? Do we celebrate self-gratification or self-discipline more? Which one do you see happening more, do you agree, why do you agree?

In Lewis's words, "Why this stream of exhortation to drive us where we cannot help going? Why such praise for those who have submitted to the inevitable? Or is it maintained that if we do obey Instinct we shall be happy and satisfied?" The inevitable being the fact that we must naturally follow our instincts --at least we "ought" to. Well, when is an impulse to be indulged or or controlled? Our impulses and instincts are constantly telling us different things. The instinct of self-preservation and self-gratification are two of our greatest impulses, but if we looked at two actions derived from each impulse they could easily be contradictory -what has precedence? Why do you give that one precedence? (Happiness, love for your neighbor, personal protection/piety --all of the above?)

Today, I'd say we aren't far from the society Lewis was writing to. However, we can certainly error in the other direction as well. In Paul's letter to the Galatians, the judaizers attempted to put the new converts under their law or personal traditions, as if the traditions themselves would affirm their new identity as Christians over and beyond their sole identity as a repentant sinner saved by Christ. They took pride in their honor -what set them apart from everyone else and the more people that shared their line of thought meant a larger support base. Paul's response to this event comes to mind while I think of all this..."they make much of you, but for no good purpose. They want to shut you out, that you may make much of them." (Gal 4:17)

You may roll your eyes with frustration as you read this book or you may affirm and obnoxiously quote this book during your next apologetic match. Either way, it's a pretty good book and may make you appreciate your understanding of C.S. Lewis, literature, and where you derive your values from a bit more.

Now, for a good summary on values and responsible action, by Bonhoeffer:

"Before other men he is justified by dire necessity; before himself he is acquitted by his conscience, but before God he hopes only for grace."

From the Abolition of Man:

"Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism. I had sooner play cards against a man who was quite skeptical about ethics, but bred to believe that a gentleman does not cheat, that against an irreproachable moral philosopher who had been brought up among sharpers. In battle it is not syllogism that will keep the reluctant nerves and muscles to their post in the third hour of the bombardment. The crudest sentimentalism (that many would wince at today) about a flag or a country or a regiment will be of more use. 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 --the seat, as Alanus tells us, of Magnanimity, of emotions organized by trained habit into stable sentiments. The chest-magnanimity-sentiment --these are the indispensable liaison officers between cerebral man and visceral man. It may even be said that it is by this middle element that man is man; for by his intellect he is mere spirit and by his appetite mere animal."

"When all that says 'it is good' has been debunked, what says 'I want' remains."

"...you cannot go on 'explaining away' forever: you will find that you have explained explanation itself away. You cannot go on 'seeing through' things for ever. 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." (less)

1 like · like · see review

Sep 29, 2012 Guanhui rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: ay2012-2013

There are books about education that one glances over and there are books about education that keep you riveted. There are moralists who bore you and there are moralists who disturb you with their keen, penetrating insights into the convoluted arguments that saturate academia.

There is no mistaking that should the thesis of this book be taken seriously, the stakes in education would find themselves much dearer. For one, we would not be dismissive of the seeming buzz-word: values.

As a Christian,...more

like · see review

Aug 21, 2011 Clare Cannon rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Young Adults & Adults

Shelves: non-fiction, adults, young-adult

How could I have done an Arts degree without reading this book?! Lewis was a genius, and everything he writes here feels indescribably relevant to the present time. I had goosebumps while reading it.

So many voices call for the abandonment of all value systems except their own, wishing somehow to 'free' society from the laws that have governed it only to impose their own, more arbitrary code.

Every humanities student (not to mention teacher) must read it.

4 likes · like · see review

Jan 24, 2011 Jennifer Freitag rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: c-s-lewis, christianity, last-hundred-years

This is a good book for the thinking Christian. Moved by the progressive modern determination to remove ourselves from ideals and to make absolute values irrelevant, Lewis sets out to show that no one can survive the destruction of Truth, and that the long human struggle to subject the world, if taken too far, leads to the inevitable end of man’s own abolition. While deeply immersed in Lewis’ philosophical background, the style itself is logical and easy to follow. It will undoubtedly take the r...more

like · see review

May 04, 2011 Steve Johnson rated it 4 of 5 stars

CS Lewis was such an incredible man and thinker. Through him God blessed this world for generations.

The Abolition of Man is one of the more intellectual pieces of Lewis' writing that I've read. I'm not sure that I fully learned everything that he was trying to teach, but now nearly a week after finishing, I continue to think about this book.

My one take-away is that modernism (he doesn't call it that) has degraded the value of humans to the point of their utility. This is a tragedy as the real...more

like · see review

title link	preview: The Abolition of Man
avg rating	preview: The Abolition of Man Goodreads rating: 3.99 (7257 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/79428.The_Abolition_of_Man?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1357613351l/79428.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/79428.The_Abolition_of_Man?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Abolition of Man by C.S. Lewis[/url]

The Abolition of Man

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (29)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About C.S. Lewis

Books by C.S. Lewis

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About The Abolition of Man

Quotes from The Abolition of Man