I've now read "The Everlasting Man" for the second time. It has some of the drawbacks other reviewers have noted--racial epithets that don't go down well in the twenty-first century, Eurocentrism (more below), a style that sometimes obscures the main point.

However, these are superficial criticisms. For the most part, it presents an examination of certain logical fallacies about the Christian faith that you sometimes hear today. The science of evolution may have moved on from what it was in Chesterton's day, but the average person's understanding of evolution hasn't.

The main point Chesterton is making, however, is that the materialist interpretation of history, founded ultimately on Marx's analysis of history as being focused on economics, is wrong. Chesterton posits instead a proviential interpretation of history--all events move according to a divine plan. In fact, Chesterton's point is that it's impossible to avoid the conclusion that history is providential. He accomplishes this with a rigorous logic, usually also exposing the flaws in other arguments.

What did I learn from this book? Well, hardly anything new. That's because I read it once before, about fifteen years ago, and the main ideas have all become vague assumptions--now considerably less vague.

Now. On the subject of Eurocentrism. In some ways, this term is as offensive as some other cultural labels that shouldn't be mentioned in polite society. What do we mean by Eurocentric? Where is the centre? In Poland? In Spain? In Greece? In Luxembourg? Like all cultural epithets, the term "eurocentrism" reduces a complex culture to an insultingly simple stereotype.

Chesterton's point is that Christianity is a faith for the whole world, not just for Europe; but it had to begin somewhere, and it found its first flourishing in Europe. That's a hard historical fact to argue against. If you're going to argue that Christianity is the best faith available--and why would be be anything else if you didn't believe that--then you're probably going to sound "Eurocentric." The Incas didn't come up with Christianity. Treating other cultures fairly isn't the same as treating them all the same.