Michael Ward: Is Morality Objective? A Discussion of C.S. Lewis’s The Abolition of Man

[@meggy8868]

That Hideous Strength changed my life. In 68 I was a New Ager. 5 months later born again

[@samargles]

This was a really great conversation. I really appreciate Ward’s insight and ability to sum up the core of Lewis’ ideas. Metaxas is great at guiding us to follow the thread of the conversation. Thank you both

[@pictureel5863]

Two wonderfully erudite and warmly engaging men. God bless you both.

[@becca8822]

Thank you Eric for all these wonderful interviews you do, I look forward to them!

[@carollew8655]

Orwell & Huxley understood wicked authoritarianism at the secular human (psycho-social, political & economic) level. CS Lewis understood it at underlying spiritual level. Thus, in my opininion, "That Hideous Strength" (which fictionally portrays the ideas in "The Abolition of Man")- is a better dystopian novel than "1984" or "Brave New World".

[@marilynmelzian7370]

Right from the very beginning, the book shows the chilling use of manipulation in a supposedly benign setting-an ordinary colleague environment. Another thing Lewis shows is the nature of temptation and how one can slide, step-by-step, into evil.

[@stefsomful]

Thank you for sharing this thought-provoking (sublime) conversation!

[@marilynmelzian7370]

Thank you!

[@andrewbfrost7021]

Audiobook please, Michael.

[@anonymoussource701]

BTW the waterfall was in Scotland

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

🐟 12. LAW, MORALITY, & ETHICS: The three terms - law, morality, and ethics - are fundamentally synonymous, since “breaking the law” implies the execution of an act which is both immoral and unethical. First of all, it is absolutely imperative to distinguish between “laws” and “rules”. Laws are divided into NATURAL laws (such as the law of gravity and the various cycles of the biosphere), as well as the MORAL laws, which are based on the principle of non-harm (such as the prohibition of murder and adultery). Societal rules, on the other hand, are merely man-made edicts, such as the regulation of business practices or the convention of driving motor vehicles on one particular side of the road. Unfortunately, very few persons are able to differentiate the inextricable laws of morality, from the mundane rules and regulations imposed by self-obsessed legislators. Therefore, this chapter of “F.I.S.H” will attempt to logically explicate moral law, as opposed to the various laws of physics. Whilst cosmological laws may transmogrify over aeons, metaethics essentially remain constant within all human societies throughout time. When either kind of law is transgressed, there is a detrimental effect on the ENTIRE universe. Therefore, even when a seemingly-innocuous act occurs (such as disposing of plastic products in a rubbish dump, thereby breaking the natural law), the universe is degraded to a certain degree. When a person is robbed of his property, not only is the victim’s life adversely affected, but now, all people need to be more vigilant. Thus, the universe as a whole is marginally degraded, just as a single cancerous cell degrades one's entire body, even if to a minuscule extent. MORALITY is concerned with how any particular act conforms to or contradicts the law. Moral acts are beneficial to oneself, to others and/or beneficial to the ecosystem, amoral actions (for the purpose of this teaching) are actions which are neither against the law nor directly benefit society (in other words, neutral acts), whilst immoral deeds are in defiance of the law (that is, premeditated actions which are intended to cause harm to individuals [including oneself], to society as a whole, or to the environment, the latter of which includes other living creatures). “Act” may include “acts” of omission. If one has the ability and the opportunity of assisting a fellow human in dire need, one ought to do so. There is but one problem regarding normative ethics, and that is, discerning which person or persons are competent to judge whether any particular act is beneficial, neutral or harmful, and if it is deemed to be harmful, what should be the penalty for the unethical/immoral act, if any. Objectively speaking, every human deed, without exception, belongs to one of the above three categories, yet who is to judge it so? Judging the actions of others is a normal, natural, and necessary function of every thinking person. However, one may PASS judgement solely on those over whom one has direct or indirect authority. One should avoid passing judgement on those over whom one has no authority, but remain silent, even if that judgment is objectively true, because it is not the place of a subordinate to judge the actions of his or her superiors. So, for example, a businessman should judge the actions of his subordinates, whether they be his wife/wives, his children, employees, and any younger kin (such as nieces, nephews, brothers, sisters, etc.). None of that businessman's subordinates has the right to adjudicate his actions - that is the role of his own masters (that is, his father, grandfather, elder brothers, uncles, priest/guru/imam/rabbi, etc). Judging/misjudging one's superiors is one of the most common sins in this wicked world - just think of the time when you last MISJUDGED one of your superiors! The ULTIMATE arbiter of any action is the current World Teacher or an Avatar. At any given time, there is one particular man, belonging to the Holy Priesthood, who has attained the highest-possible level of wisdom and understanding of life, and therefore, has the greatest moral authority on earth. The current World Teacher is the author of this Holy Scripture, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”. Obviously, it is not practical for the World Teacher or a Divine Incarnation (“Avatāra”, in Sanskrit) to adjudicate each and every criminal case in the world. Fortunately, there is established a natural system of justice to perform this function, as explained elsewhere in this chapter. As concisely explained in the previous chapter, humans do not possess individual free-will. However, that does not necessarily imply that there is no optimal way of living. There is, in fact, an ideal way for humans to behave in every situation, even if it was ordained that we each behave according to destiny, and therefore, imperfectly. Morality is indeed OBJECTIVE, that is to say, independent of the subjective whims or opinions of any particular person. In order for even the smallest society to function smoothly, a moral benchmark must be chosen and adhered to. Having understood that the basis of law/morality/ethics is the concept of non-harm (“ahiṃsā”, in Sanskrit), it is obvious that there is no need to invoke any religious or supernatural belief system in order to establish law in society. There are examples of secular societies which have survived relatively peacefully over many centuries, without the imposition of a monotheistic system of law/morality/ethics.If an act is harmful to any person, animal or plant (or even inorganic matter, in the case of environmental degradation), then it is immoral, and contravenes the one and only law of the universe. In other words, it is against YOUR law, since you are, fundamentally, All There Is (“Brahman”, in Sanskrit). Read previous chapters of “F.I.S.H” to learn the true nature of Reality, and how you are that Absolute Reality (“tat tvam asi”, in Sanskrit). It can be argued that even miscreants want to live a perfectly blameless life. “No man chooses evil because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness.” Immoral/criminal acts are entirely due to a false understanding of oneself and a misunderstanding of what constitutes true peace/happiness. A fully-enlightened saint will never DELIBERATELY cause harm to himself or to others because he knows that his continuing peace of mind depends on him choosing the most beneficial course of action. He will not commit such a detestable action as rape, because he understands that it will disturb his blissful state of existence and hurt another human being, as well as the victim’s loved-ones. It will also harm society, because if he commits sexual assault, every woman in his community will need to take precautions against possible attack. So, THEORETICALLY, homosexuals themselves fully agree that homosexual offenders ought to be put to death for their crime, because, if not, their perverse behaviour will contribute to the destruction of society, which is built on the family unit, which in turn is based on sexual complementarity (i.e. heterosexuality). Like every person who ever lived, homosexuals desire, more than anything, genuine peace and happiness, which can never be achieved by unnatural sexual acts and attachments. Some (if not most) persons would counter thus: “But there will always be heterosexual couples who will reproduce, so why not leave homosexuals be?”. That is similar to stating “But if only twenty per cent of the population is murdered, there will still be eighty per cent of society remaining”. Crime left unpunished is the beginning of the end of civilization, as can be very clearly seen in the present age, particularly in those nations governed by non-monarchical (so-called) “leaders”. So, in summary, you do not want to transgress your OWN laws, knowing that if you do so, you may become afflicted with guilt, and individuals or society will be harmed. Unfortunately, many persons (demons) are unconcerned about how their actions affect others, or even themselves. It’s not unheard of for a murderer, for instance, to recognize his deed to be unjust, and to concede that he ought to be hanged to death for his crime, or even commit suicide in order to avoid the need for a hangman. Primatologists have observed simple moral behaviour in great apes. There are some otherwise highly-enlightened spiritual teachers who erroneously believe that the solution to discerning proper morality and living a completely ethical life, is for each individual person to raise themselves to the teacher's own high-level of consciousness, so that they will AUTOMATICALLY behave in a loving manner in each situation, without the requirement of a moral code. E.g. “Love, and do what you will”. Obviously, no two persons who ever lived could possibly agree on EVERY moral infraction and what should be the exact form of punishment (if any) for each and every moral transgression. Not even the two most holy and righteous persons on earth at any given time would fully agree on what constitutes a criminal/unethical act, and even if they were to agree, they may not agree on what ought to be the penalty for each and every crime. And even if they do agree on all those details, what of the billions of miscreants who are far below their exalted level? Should a government freely allow its citizens to behave according to their whims, in the vain hope that they will one day reach spiritual perfection? That is akin to anarchy. This alone should demonstrate that subjective moral systems are impractical, unfair and unwise, as they are capricious. Cont...

[@maram-k4r]

I am your sister from Yemen, and by Allah I only spoke out of hunger and distress. My mother, my brothers, and I lessons and tears. We are in a situation that only God knows about. God is sufficient for us, and He is the best disposer of affairs for those who broughtOh people, we are your sisters, by God 😭😭😭 We do not even find a loaf of bread inside the house that would satisfy you, oh nation of Muhammad. People are brothers. Oh God, make your righteous servants subservient to us. Oh God, make your righteous servants subservient to us. My appeal to every Muslim, oh Lord, if he sees this message, may He prolong his life, make him happy, and cover him. May God reward him. God is sufficient for me, and He is the best disposer of affairs. There is no power or strength except with God. Oh people, oh nation of Muhammad, oh people of goodness, oh people of mercy. We are your sisters and your children. By God, we do not even find a loaf of bread inside the house that wouldsatisfy you. Oh nation of Muhammad, I only spoke out of extreme hunger and distress. My mother, sisters, and I are displaced from our homes because of the war. We are in a state that no one knows about except God. God is sufficient for us, and He is the best disposer of affairs, against those who brought us to this state 💔💔 By God Almighty, I only wrote this appeal out of extreme poverty and poverty, oh people. I beg you by God Almighty, Lord of the Mighty Throne, that I do not have food at home. By God, my brothers and sisters have been sitting around for two days. Without food, by God our situation is very difficult, we are 4 people in the house and my father passed away and there is no one to support us and we live in a rented house and we cannot pay the rest of the rent. I am not lying to you nor deceiving you nor cheating you. I am a Yemeni girl displaced because of the war between me and my family over a rent dispute and the owner of the house. By God, my brother comes every dayand humiliates us and talks about us and wants us to go out to the street because we are unable to pay him the rent. The neighbors saw us crying and talked to the neighbors again and gave us a deadline until the end of the week and we swore to God to let us out of the street now we are in arrears of 60 thousand Yemeni riyals for 3 months rent may God have mercy on us our country is suffering because of this war and we do not find our daily sustenance and we live my mother and sisters our father passed away may God have mercy on him and we do not have anyone in the world to come to us in these harsh circumstances my little sisters went out to the street and saw the neighbors eating and stood at their door giving them even a piece of bread and by God in whose hand is the heavens and the earth they closed the door and kicked them out and they came back crying dying of hunger no one has mercy on them and now the holiday has comeback to me if no one of us helps us with a kilo of flour by God we will die of hunger brother I seek refuge in God and then in you and I want your help for the sake of God I ask you by God you love goodness and help me even if it is about the rent of the house send me a WhatsApp message on this number 00967772168484 and ask for my card name and send it and do not delay may God compensate you with all good My little sisters, look at their situation and help us and save us before they throw us out into the street and humiliate us or my family and I die of hunger. We ask you by God, if you are able to help us, do not delay on us, and may God reward you with good.'~~_«%•&»_~~_~&:»'///♡~،'~;l.i.i.i.i.i.l.|,,,,،،،،،،،.،...،،~~♡~~♡~•~•~•♧♧(･|~;l.i.i.i.i♧♧♤...,,;!;;!;:!,!;!!;!;!,!;!.......😢;;;:,".,;;".".😢,",":,:,:,:,;.;.;.......

[@robertcalleja2348]

Where are you from

[@RazziLuix]

I do acknowledge. My sister. You are Superior, sense the begining Man began to think for himself- In magnitude of; People, Faith, & Promise... You ALWAYS represent ...INHERENT NEED. Facilitated by Peace! ❤

[@RazziLuix]

Our choice to Freedom from Sufferings is barbaric.

[@ji8044]

I think one of the great ironies in the above conversation comes from the writings of Lewis taking what was in his lifetime a very non-traditional moral attitude toward Judaism. in 1933 he wrote this: "nothing can fully excuse the iniquity of Hitler’s persecution of the Jews, or the absurdity of his theoretical position. Did you see that he said ‘The Jews have made no contritution to human culture and in crushing them I am doing the will of the Lord.’ Now as the whole idea of the ‘Will of the Lord’ is precisely what the world owes to the Jews, the blaspheming tyrant has just fixed his absurdity for all to see in a single sentence, and shown that he is as contemptible for his stupidity as he is detestable for his cruelty. For the German people as a whole we ought to have charity; but for dictators, ‘Nordic’ tyrants and so on - well, read the chapter about Mr. Savage in the Regress and you have my views" So Lewis had a high regard for the Jews, which went against 1500 years of teaching about them by the Catholic Church, where Hitler first learned his anti-Semitic ideas. Lewis actually proved himself wrong in the theme of The Abolition of Man by being so far ahead of society about Judaism. In his own lifetime anti-Semitism was considered to have a sound moral basis, therefor his own enlightened attitude toward Judaism, presaging the post WWII transition by Christianity, made the case for moral subjectivity. Like Wilber Wilberforce and many other individual Christians in history he contradicted the moral teachings of his church. (Now please, before the more historically ignorant commenters rend their garments and say Hitler's attitude was unconnected to Catholicism look up Father Charles Coughlin. He was quite literally the most famous Catholic priest in the world and also a raging anti-Semite who never received one word of rebuke or condemnation from Pope Pius XI and was only silenced by his bishop AFTER Germany declared war on the US.)

[@nicholasmaloni7595]

I'm pretty sure the Catholic Church opposed the entire Nazi movement in Germany at that time - have I missed something here?

[@ji8044]

@@nicholasmaloni7595 Yes, you missed the fact that the Catholic Church never opposed either Hitler or Mussolini. In fact Pope Pius didn't even excommunicate either one, or issue an interdict against church service in either country. Did you know that Catholic chaplains served in the Wehrmacht until the end of the war without being defrocked?

[@nicholasmaloni7595]

@ji8044 I probably should've been more specific - I'm referring to Catholic dissent groups such the White Rose 🌹. I didn't actually know the additional information - so thank you for that.

[@ji8044]

@@nicholasmaloni7595 Oh yes there were many brave individual Catholics who were against fascism in both countries.

[@RazziLuix]

God! I survived.

[@bobtaylor170]

Thumbs down for you, Eric. I can't abide the juvenescence.

[@christopherdowns2430]

can you remix this his voice is so highly pitched can't listen to it his sssssssss is unbearable

[@truincanada]

Wow. Get over yourself / moat boy.

[@ji8044]

Quite wrong opening, satan in Hebrew is not a name (anymore than adam is a name) It means accuser or adversary. It doesn't refer to Yahweh's supposed nemesis. If Yahweh HAD a nemesis during Genesis; it would completely undermine the Jewish view of him. It wasn't until the Hellenistic period that we begin to see Persian/Greek concepts such as diablos when the accuser satan becomes the warden of hell and leader of the dark forces of the world satan. This is easily demonstrated by the conversion of the snake in the Garden of Eden into Satan, though there is no basis for that idea in the story itself.

[@c.m.granger6870]

So now Ward is an apostate? So disappointing

[@Amishland_Chateau]

An indication that you need to get off your false philosophical throne

[@c.m.granger6870]

@Amishland_Chateau It was a comment on theology. It would help if you knew what you were talking about before opening your mouth.