Review of The Abolition of Man

C. S. Lewis published The Abolition of Man in 1943, with the material made of three separate lectures he gave that same year. It has been regarded by many as Lewis’s most important book, as it delves into his idea that education, whether outside or inside the home, should be done in the context of moral law and objective values.

Throughout the book, Lewis argues for an objectivist position in aesthetics and morality, arguing that the inherent qualities and values in things and positions are not just projected onto them. Two objectivists may disagree on whether a work of art or a human act is good or not, but both believe there are standards by which the work or act should be judged. Unlike subjectivists, objectivists hold common principles on which they base their judgments.

The “doctrine of objective values”, which Lewis calls the Tao, is “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.” Lewis uses the Chinese term Tao for what he refers to elsewhere in the book as “Natural Law or Traditional Morality” to emphasize the universality of traditional values: people throughout history and around the world believe in the same objective values.

He illustrates this universality in one of the appendixes that give quotations from widely varying cultures, both ancient and modern, Eastern and Western, showing their agreement on the need for “general beneficence” and on specific duties for parents, elders, and children, and agreement that loyalty and justice are consistently praised while disloyalty, lying, theft, and murder are consistently condemned.

The lectures begin with a critique of a composition textbook published a few years earlier. Lewis’s concern about the book is that while it teaches writing, it also subtly advocates subjectivism. Such moments occur, for example, when the textbook refers to an observer who calls a waterfall “sublime”. Lewis quotes the textbook’s claim that, in such observations, “[w]e appear to be saying something very important about something, and actually we are only saying something about our own feelings.”

Lewis points in particular toward the textbook’s use of the words appear and only to show how dismissive words like these suggest that predicates of value are merely projections of the inner state of the speaker and have no significance. Lewis replies that the speaker is not just expressing his feelings but asserting that the object merits those emotions.

On this ground, Lewis argues the importance of objectivism for education. Children aren’t born with the knowledge of appropriate reactions; those reactions must be nurtured. According to Lewis, “The little human animal will not at first have the right responses. It must be trained to feel pleasure, liking, disgust, and hatred at those things which are pleasant, likable, disgusting, and hateful.” Thus, teachers and parents who are objectivists teach their children principles of right and wrong, because if a child knows the right principles, Lewis claims, he or she will respond in certain situations with the right sentiments and will know the right thing to do.

Right sentiments are the key concept in the book. When using it, Lewis means “emotions conform[ing] to Reason.” As he explains it, “The heart never takes the place of the head: but it can, and should, obey it.” When children’s emotions have been trained like this, their moral impulses can be trusted to lead them correctly.

In Lewis’ opinion, the ability to have the right sentiments is what separates humans from animals, but such training of the heart—training of the emotions, what Lewis refers to as the “chest”—is lacking in modern education, replaced by an emphasis on the intellect. The failure to nurture right sentiments ultimately results in the abolition of man, Lewis argues, because modern education produces “what may be called Men without Chests.”

I enjoyed this book, as it was more challenging and thought-provoking than most of the books I’ve read recently. It was very interesting and I agreed with a lot of what Lewis said. I like how he was subtly preaching the praises of homeschooling, or at least that’s the impression I received. The problems he describes are just as prevalent, if not more problematic, today, so I would definitely recommend this book to anyone in high school and above.