CS Lewis proves again why he is the master moralist in this near prophetic reflection on man and his destiny as it relates to the growing tendency to moral relativism and how that may influence science and technology.
Lewis slowly builds his argument with a seemingly tangential reference to a children's English Language text and the difference between true literary academia and a weak diluted version thereof. He uses the illustration to compare moral relativism to what he calls the Natural Law or The Tao.
His argument slowly builds to a proposition that moral relativism will grow in prominence and lead mankind to a point where he can adjust ethical standards according to his own agenda (he makes reference to the Nazi regime - it would have been a more recent occurrence in his lifetime). Lewis suggests that mankind, in his quest to 'remake himself' according to his own amorphous ethics, will embark upon determining future generations even through something like genetic manipulation. This, Lewis suggests, will effectively rob all future generations of the ability to be men, hence 'the Abolition of Man'.
The essence of Lewis' argument is that the sloughing off of the Natural Law will be man's ultimate demise and instinct alone (as a product of evolution) is no reliable moral guide. He suggests that a purely scientific approach to man is not advisable, but manages to anticipate some current secular arguments by implying that science and faith/morality are complimentary rather than contradictory. Lewis was way ahead of his time.
However, the most insightful idea that Lewis proposes (at least in my mind) is regarding his observation that man's 'dominance of nature' does not include all men by any means. He points out that each culture, generation and community is effectively ruled by a few specific groups who truly do hold most of the power, while many others are very much subject to nature. It is these dominant groups among men that potentially hold the keys to man's destruction.
Interestingly, this idea of man's extermination at the hands of his own ingenuity has been expressed through contemporary pop culture in the iconic Martix Trilogy, the Terminator series and the animated feature, 9. Perhaps the Tower of Babel story depicting God, wary of a mankind for whom anything is possible, was a warning of what could happen should the darker side of man attain 'the power of the gods'.
However, the most insightful idea that Lewis proposes (at least in my mind) is regarding his observation that man's 'dominance of nature' does not include all men by any means. He points out that each culture, generation and community is effectively ruled by a few specific groups who truly do hold most of the power, while many others are very much subject to nature. It is these dominant groups among men that potentially hold the keys to man's destruction.
Interestingly, this idea of man's extermination at the hands of his own ingenuity has been expressed through contemporary pop culture in the iconic Martix Trilogy, the Terminator series and the animated feature, 9. Perhaps the Tower of Babel story depicting God, wary of a mankind for whom anything is possible, was a warning of what could happen should the darker side of man attain 'the power of the gods'.
My only criticism of the book is that it is too short. He could have countered more of the alternative arguments to the Natural Law. Still he ends the book brilliantly, citing universal ethical standards like fidelity, care for the poor and respect for parents across culture, creeds and history as evidence of the Natural Law.
It's an excellent read and great guide to methodical thinking and construction of apologetic argument. You won't be disappointed.
