The Abolition of Man - The Way

Integrated Study Guide: Session #2

This session is part of the multi-post Study Guide titled "Learning to Pray with C.S. Lewis." You may find it helpful to refer to the introduction and session one to understand the nature of the project as a whole.

"The human mind has no more power of inventing a new value than of imagining a new primary colour, or, indeed, of creating a new sun and a new sky for it to move in." — C.S. Lewis

Primary Reading:

• C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man, Chapter 2: "The Way"

Theological Context: The Rational Necessity of Objective Value

In Chapter 2 of The Abolition of Man, Lewis deepens his defense of objective moral value by demonstrating that the rejection of the Tao is not merely harmful but fundamentally irrational. Building on his critique of the fact/value distinction in Chapter 1, Lewis now examines various attempts to establish values on foundations other than the Tao, particularly through appeals to "instinct" or other supposedly more "realistic" bases.

The Unity of Reason and Value

The significance of this chapter extends beyond philosophical debate to touch core theological questions about the nature of human reason. Lewis challenges the modern assumption that reason functions as a neutral instrument that could theoretically justify or undermine any value system. Instead, he argues that rationality always presupposes certain values. Indeed, Lewis argues that reason and value are inextricably linked rather than separable domains of human experience.

This insight resonates deeply with the Christian understanding of the Logos as revealed in Scripture. When John's Gospel declares that "In the beginning was the Word (Logos)" (John 1:1), it identifies Christ not only as the agent of creation but as the rational principle that structures reality itself. Consider this basic explanation from the Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible:

John uses the term logos, familiar in Greek philosophy for the abstract principle of reason exhibited by an orderly universe, itself the source of the reason innate in man. By using this term, John relates Jesus to the culture prevailing beyond Jewry, to the popular cosmology current at the end of the 1st century. R.E.O. White, “Word,” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 2160.

The early Church Fathers recognized that the Greek philosophical concept of Logos and the Johannine revelation of Christ as the eternal Word were profoundly connected - that in John's gospel, the eternal Word (Logos) is presented as the fulfillment of the Greek philosophical idea of a logos.

Throughout his philosophical works, Lewis argues that human rationality can only be trusted if our minds participate in and derive their reasoning capabilities from an eternal, unchanging divine Intelligence that exists beyond the physical universe—our ability to recognize truth depends on our connection to this transcendent rational foundation (See, for example, Miracles, Chapter 3).

Think of how a musician can recognize whether notes are in tune or out of tune. This recognition doesn't come from personal preference but from the mathematical relationships between frequencies. Similarly, moral reasoning depends on recognizing harmonies and dissonances in the moral order—relationships that exist independently of our preferences.

Lewis begins Chapter 2 with the stark claim that "the practical result of education in the spirit of The Green Book must be the destruction of the society which accepts it." This is not merely rhetorical flourish but the logical conclusion of his argument. If education undermines the very values that make social cohesion possible, society itself becomes unsustainable. As we explore Lewis's argument, we'll see how he methodically dismantles attempts to establish values on foundations other than the Tao.

Key Concepts

The Self-Contradictory Nature of Rejecting the Tao

Lewis begins by demonstrating that those who reject traditional values inevitably smuggle in their own value judgments derived from the very tradition they claim to debunk. He observes:

However subjective they may be about some traditional values, Gaius and Titius have shown by the very act of writing The Green Book that there must be some other values about which they are not subjective at all.

This inconsistency reveals that complete ethical skepticism is impossible to maintain consistently. Even the most thorough debunker of traditional values must stand somewhere to leverage their critique. As Lewis notes, these critics typically "hold with complete uncritical dogmatism, the whole system of values which happened to be in vogue among moderately educated young men of the professional classes during the period between the two wars."

And here is the glaring hypocrisy of The Green Book and so many appeals to subjectivism - The very act of writing a book to persuade others actually betrays a commitment to certain values—truth-telling, intellectual integrity, and the importance of education—that cannot themselves be reduced to subjective preference.

Reason and Value as Inseparable

Lewis's most profound insight in this chapter may be his argument that rational thought itself presupposes the Tao rather than functioning as a neutral tool that might justify or undermine it. He illustrates this through what he calls the Experimentum Crucis—asking how one could rationally argue that some men should sacrifice themselves for the survival of the human species if all values are merely subjective.

He writes:

From propositions about fact alone no practical conclusion can ever be drawn. This will preserve society cannot lead to do this except by the mediation of society ought to be preserved.

Without this mediating value judgment, no factual observation can generate moral obligation. Lewis therefore concludes:

We must therefore either extend the word Reason to include what our ancestors called Practical Reason and confess that judgments such as society ought to be preserved... are not mere sentiments but are rationality itself; or else we must give up at once, and forever, the attempt to find a core of 'rational' value behind all the sentiments we have debunked.

This argument challenges the modern separation of fact and value that we examined in Session 1. Far from being a neutral tool that can operate independently of values, reason itself presupposes certain fundamental values without which rational thought becomes incoherent.

The Inadequacy of Instinct

When traditional values are rejected, appeals to "instinct" often emerge as an alternative foundation. Lewis dismantles this approach through three strong critiques:

1. Appeals to instinct smuggle in normative language: "It is maintained that we must obey Instinct, that we cannot do otherwise. But if so, why are Green Books and the like written?" The very attempt to persuade people to follow instinct betrays the recognition that instinct alone does not determine human behavior.

2. We have conflicting instincts: "Telling us to obey Instinct is like telling us to obey 'people.' People say different things. So do instincts. Our instincts are at war." Without some principle beyond instinct, we have no basis for prioritizing one instinct over another.

3. The instincts being championed often lack instinctual basis: "What we have by nature is an impulse to preserve our own children and grandchildren; an impulse which grows progressively feebler as the imagination looks forward and finally dies out in the 'deserts of vast futurity'." The values that modern innovators attempt to preserve often require principles beyond mere instinct.

Consider how contemporary ethical discourse often appeals to concepts like "authenticity" or "being true to yourself" as moral guides. Lewis would point out that these appeals lack coherence without some higher standard for determining which aspects of the self ought to be expressed and which ought to be restrained.

The Tao as the Source of All Critique

Lewis demonstrates that even attempts to criticize or reform the Tao must draw from the Tao itself:

The Innovator attacks traditional values (The Tao) in defense of what he at first supposes to be (in some special sense) 'rational' or 'biological' values. But as we have seen, all the values which he uses in attacking the Tao, and even claims to be substituting for it, are themselves derived from the Tao.

This insight reveals that moral reform occurs not by stepping outside tradition but by drawing more deeply from its central principles. Lewis illustrates this with the example of an innovator who prioritizes care for posterity:

The Tao of course agrees with him about the importance of getting the people fed and clothed. Unless the Innovator were himself using the Tao he could never have learned of such a duty. But side by side with it in the Tao lie those duties of justice and good faith which he is ready to debunk.

The rebellion against the Tao is therefore fundamentally self-defeating: "The rebellion of new ideologies against the Tao is a rebellion of the branches against the tree: if the rebels could succeed they would find that they had destroyed themselves."

The Development of the Tao from Within

While defending the Tao's necessity, Lewis acknowledges that it is not static but develops through deepening insight: "From the Confucian 'Do not do to others what you would not like them to do to you' to the Christian 'Do as you would be done by' is a real advance." This development occurs not by rejection but by fulfillment—new insights that complete rather than contradict earlier understanding.

Lewis distinguishes between legitimate development and arbitrary innovation: "The legitimate reformer endeavors to show that the precept in question conflicts with some precept which its defenders allow to be more fundamental, or that it does not really embody the judgments of value it professes to embody." True development emerges from within the tradition rather than being imposed from outside.

Perhaps most importantly, Lewis insists that "only those who are practicing the Tao will understand it." The Tao is not merely an intellectual system to be comprehended but a living tradition that must be inhabited. This experiential dimension of moral knowledge challenges purely theoretical approaches to ethics and suggests that moral understanding requires participation rather than mere observation.

Questions for Reflection

1. Lewis argues that attempts to reject the Tao inevitably smuggle in values derived from the Tao itself. Can you identify examples in contemporary culture where those who reject traditional moral frameworks nevertheless appeal to moral principles derived from those same traditions? (If you’ve read Tom Holland’s Dominion, this should be easy).

2. Consider Lewis's claim that reason and value are inseparable, that practical reason itself depends on certain fundamental values. How does this insight challenge the modern tendency to separate facts from values? What implications might this have for how we understand both human rationality and divine revelation?

3. Lewis challenges the attempt to ground values in instinct, showing that we have conflicting instincts requiring some higher principle to adjudicate between them. How might this critique apply to contemporary appeals to "authenticity" or "being true to yourself" as moral guides?

4. When Lewis writes that "the rebellion of new ideologies against the Tao is a rebellion of the branches against the tree," what does this metaphor suggest about the relationship between innovation and tradition? How might this principle apply to developments in theological understanding or spiritual practices?

5. Lewis states that "only those who are practicing the Tao will understand it." What does this suggest about the relationship between moral action and moral knowledge? How might this principle relate to Jesus's teaching that "If anyone’s will is to do God’s will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority." (John 7:17)?

6. In Mere Christianity, Lewis writes: "Everyone has heard people quarreling... They say things like this: 'How'd you like it if anyone did the same to you?'... 'Come on, you promised.'" How do these common moral arguments reflect Lewis's point that we cannot escape appealing to the Tao, even when criticizing parts of it?

7. How might Lewis's defense of the Tao's rational necessity relate to our understanding of prayer as a rational response to the Logos—or to a rationally ordered creation? In what ways could prayer be understood as participation in the rational order of creation? This question may or may not make sense to you—if it does not, then be patient. We will make this clear by the end of our intensive course.

Practical Exercise: Examining Contemporary Moral Discourses (2-3 days)

Over the next few days, identify and analyze a contemporary moral argument or critique—perhaps from a news article, opinion piece, social media post, or public speech. As you examine this discourse, consider the following questions:

1. What moral principles does this argument appeal to, either explicitly or implicitly?

2. How might these principles be connected to what Lewis calls the Tao? Do they reflect traditional moral principles, or do they claim to be based on some alternative foundation?

3. If the argument critiques traditional moral standards, does it do so by appealing to other values within the Tao (legitimate development), or does it attempt to establish moral principles on some entirely different foundation (innovation from outside)?

4. Does the argument acknowledge conflicts between competing moral principles? If so, how does it adjudicate between them?

After completing your analysis, write a brief reflection (1-2 paragraphs) on how Lewis's insights have helped you understand this moral discourse differently. Consider especially whether the argument exemplifies what Lewis describes as the self-contradictory nature of rejecting the Tao while still making moral claims.

If you wish to extend this reflection, you might consider how your understanding of Lewis's argument relates to your own spiritual practices, including prayer. Does recognizing the rational necessity of the Tao shed any light on how you understand communication with God?