Lewis' Philosophy of Goodness, Reality, & Man
Book Club begins | Mere Christianity: Book 1
Is it okay if I begin at the end?
“In religion, as in war and everything else, comfort is the one thing you cannot get by looking for it. If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end: if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth—only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin with and, in the end, despair.” (p. 32)
Here and scattered throughout these chapters, Lewis denounces “soft soap,” sugar coating, sweet-talk, and wishful thinking. He declares again and again that our highest priority and aim must be truth. He knows what is in man. He knows that sometimes we walk down the wrong path, not because we think it is the right one, but because we hope it is the right one.
This inclination of man can be more or less dire; but when we are navigating the kinds of topics in this book, it is imperative that we are led not by comfort-seeking and wishful thinking, but by a resolute pursuit of Truth.
Truth.
Lewis is fixated on Truth. He believes that there is Truth, that Truth is not relative or subjective, and that there is a Real Reality that exists regardless of our perception of it. He is also well aware that he is placing himself on one side a philosophical debate that has been marching on through the ages, from the ancient Greeks right into the elite institutions of our modern day.
This longstanding debate has captured the schools of philosophy since philosophy existed. The question: does Truth exist? Or is truth what we subjectively assign to be true based on a collective agreement? Can a truth be true today and untrue tomorrow? Can I have “my truth” and you have “your truth?” Is truth simply what the strongest and most powerful decide is true? Or does Truth exist despite what we believe about it? Are there unchanging laws and patterns established in the universe that we have no control over or power to manipulate? Can we decide what is true and untrue, or are things simply True or Untrue?
Over 2,300 years ago, Plato and Socrates battled intellectually with a group called the Sophists over this question.
A difference of opinion on this question is what led to much of the World War that Lewis found himself writing in the midst of 83 years ago.
I will let you consider yourself the ways we are still fighting over this question today.
But Lewis does not spend any time debating the question here. He definitively places himself on one side of the debate, and builds all of his arguments on what I agree is a firm foundation.
There is one particular aspect of Reality that he locks in on—a truth about Man.
“These, then, are the two points I wanted to make. 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.” (p. 8)
In these chapters, light is shed on a peculiar thing about human beings: often we know the right thing to do, but do not do it. This may seem, as Lewis says in chapter 3, “the most natural thing in the world,” but really this is a very strange thing about people, and an idea that lies at the bottom of all he is trying to tell us.
Now, Lewis intentionally does not appeal to Christian doctrine in these chapters, and for good reason. But I do not have any similar restrictions and will exercise my liberty—this peculiar thing about human beings is explained by our design and our fall.
Our design:
Man is made in the image of God. This is how and why we were created—to be like God. To be honest and tell the Truth. To love one another. To be faithful to our beloved.
Our fall:
But, because of sin, we have stumbled and fallen into corruption. We have taken the instincts and desires that God placed within us for good, and wielded them improperly.
Imagine a pen: a tool filled with ink, designed to translate thoughts within the mind onto paper — becoming poetry, sketches that become paintings, and meditations of the human heart. This is a beautiful tool designed to create beautiful things.
Now imagine you took that same pen and instead tried to use it as a hammer. First, you would recognize the absurdity of that. Second, it would not be long before you destroyed the pen.
Man is the pen, created for the glorious purpose of reflecting God’s Nature in the world. But instead of submitting to the joy of fulfilling our purpose, we choose other things and destroy ourselves.
What a thing to do.
But this is the agency God has created us with. This is a part of bearing His image. We have these instincts we share with all the animals, but a Law within us that directs us in how to properly wield the instincts.
Man has the highest purpose in God’s creation, as well as the unique ability to rebel against that Law within him—to deny his purpose and act contrary to his design.
Lewis deducts that if God exists and placed within us this Moral Law, He must, Himself, be Good—absolutely Good, no darkness within Him. “He is not soft,” and His Law is “hard as nails. It tells you to do the straight thing and it does not seem to care how painful, or dangerous, or difficult it is to do.”
But if He is Good and we are rebels of His Law, we are in grave danger.
“Goodness is either the great safety or the great danger—according to the way you react to it. And we have reacted the wrong way.” (p. 31)
Lewis begins with all this philosophy—introducing the ideas of Goodness and a God and Law and Reality and Man’s condition—in an effort to prepare a person for Christianity’s answers to these hard questions.
“the Christian religion is, in the long run, a thing of unspeakable comfort. But it does not begin in comfort; it begins in the dismay I have been describing, and it is no use at all trying to go on to that comfort without first going through that dismay.” (p. 32)
We must face the facts and run head-first into the relentless pursuit of Truth, despite the pain and discomfort we will likely face. We must get to the bottom of the unrelenting questions raised by a hard look at Reality.
There are a bunch of other things I would love to comment on—his description of the 2 competing theories for existence, the balance of instincts and their relation to virtue, his brilliant take on Progress, and more.
But, this is where I would like to open the floor to you:
what ideas stuck out to you?
what questions did you find yourself asking as you read?
did Lewis’ logic and philosophy hold water? or were there holes you could see in his arguments?
were there any compelling ideas you hadn’t encountered before?
did anything from these chapters change your mind in some way?
Share your thoughts in the comment section of this post. We are excited to hear from you!
P.S. Next week’s reading will be “Book 2” (page 35-65 in most copies). Post for that section will go live Saturday, 8/9!
A few ideas that stuck out to me:
We learn in science class that there is a difference between a “law” and a “theory.” Laws are theories that have been proven over and over again from multiple different angles and have held firm. A classic example that Lewis mentions several times throughout the first book is the Law of Universal Gravitation. I found it interesting that he describes the Law of Human Nature as a law and claims that we have confused it with other laws such as the Law of Universal Gravitation. I wondered throughout this reading whether it would’ve been more appropriate to refer to it as the “Theory of Human Nature?’ He spends a lot of time in this reading making a stance for why the LOHM does exist and should be believed. Substituting “theory” for “law” in almost all instances the LOHM was mentioned helped me better understand what Lewis was trying to say.
—————————
I agree with Lewis’s idea that we all essentially understand the LOHM, but, for whatever reason, choose not to follow it. This, to me, spoke about human integrity. Choosing “good” or “right” isn’t always easy. It likely isn’t easy even a fraction of the time, much less the majority. Many people claim to have integrity, and they certainly do when it comes to others. They would never miss a lunch date or fail to turn in an assignment at work. But, much like the idea that we make concessions and excuses for ourselves, we also lack integrity when it comes to ourselves. We break the promises we make to ourselves — “I’ll start going to the gym next month. Okay, this week, the diet starts for real. I’m going to go back to school this fall and finish my degree.” Over time, this behavior becomes habitual. Failures and broken promises multiply, which then diminishes the trust and confidence we have in ourselves and the validity of our own word with ourselves.
I think this damaged self-image feeds in to some of the interactions Lewis was referring to in Book 3. With our own wounded and mistrusting view of ourselves, we start trying to label the behavior of other humans and determine their intent. Was their offense to you purposeful or accidental? Then, we base our reactions accordingly. Stack on a culture that feeds on distraction through clickbait or ragebait and an economy whose hottest commodity is your time and attention, and you have a vicious feedback loop that makes it extremely challenging to follow the LOHM, even if you want to. It is easy and feels normalized to develop and opinion on every single issue, almost as if you’re wrong if you aren’t mad about something. We are set up to forget that everyone is more alike than different and that most people are not acting out of malice or hatred.
—————————
The herd instinct Lewis mentions in Book 2 was an idea I hadn’t encountered before. This idea interested me because the USA is typically considered an individualistic society (vs a pluralistic one). I think this ties into another common issue we see in today’s world — everyone wants to have a village, but (speaking in broad strokes) nobody wants to be a villager. It feels good to be the helper or the hero in any given situation, but we freeze and shy away when the roles are reversed and it is our turn to seek and accept assistance. This deficiency, I think, plays into the instinctual dilemma Lewis described in this chapter, and a greater willingness to “be a villager” would go a long way to bolster the instincts related to the LOHM.
It was a great read and I don't have much to add to what you said, Ty. I just love that what he wrote all those years ago is still as relevant today as it was then. But thus is truth...unchanging and forever relevant.