Summary Of C. S. Lewis Mere Christianity
RIGHT AND WRONG AS A CLUE TO THE MEANING OF THE UNIVERSE C.S. Lewis has presented many intriguing ideas in regards to how right and wrong relate to the universe. The moral law is a genuine thing, whether we agree with it or not. Lewis presents there is an absolute good and an absolute bad within the laws of human nature. As human beings, we tend to have a great deal of trouble interpreting our own selves. Within Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis provides me with useful insight to help me understand my own personal life. Furthermore, throughout the course of my life I have wrestled with the idea of an absolute right versus an absolute wrong. Lewis points out within our own mental state we have our own way of portraying morality in reference to
…show more content…
the world around us. For example, the way I see the world in my eyes will never be the same as someone else’s point of view.
In addition, I have always oddly felt as if my moral compass is heightened in a sense. I will never say I am better than another human being, however I do feel as if I am gifted with an ability of foresight. The thoughts Lewis conveys in Mere Christianity are not at all foreign to me, it is more as if I have had these conversations about morality before. Whilst reading Mere Christianity, there was an additional theory which stood out, “Now what interests me about all these remarks is that the man who makes them is not merely saying that the other man’s behaviour does not happen to please him. He is appealing to some kind of standard which he expects the other man to know about. And the other man very seldom replies: ‘To hell with your standard.’ Nearly always he tries to make out that what he has been doing does not really go against the standard, or that if it does there is some special excuse” (Lewis, 1952, p.1). Personally, there is a variety of ways for me to dissect this passage. However, I would like to speak on why this particular passage resonates with me. Within my own realm of interaction with other human beings, I tend to become upset rather quickly with them. This concept of creating your own moral standard and
philosophy oftentimes corrupts my relationships with others. As an athlete, and someone who is incredibly determined to do the right thing but also perform to the best of my God given ability, I am a cruel human being. The reason I portray myself as cruel is due to the fact of my personal moral standard being unreasonably high. While leaving myself with nearly zero margin for error in everything in life, it becomes easy to associate others within my extreme moral standard. The problem with that is, no one will ever understand the natural pressure of my standard. Therefore, nearly every human being I have shared genuine, intimate feelings with has let me down because I feel as if I do not relate to anyone in their own standard. Plenty of uncertainty has overcome me from feeling as if my standard is simply wrong. Whether I am justified or not to feel a certain way is beyond me, it only becomes difficult when I am told I am foolish for such a mentality. I understand the moral standard as well as the law of human nature. I believe God has created me to serve others and to operate as kind and gracious human being. My only issue is, it becomes increasingly difficult to show grace to others when I cannot do the same for myself. Coincidentally enough, throughout the duration of reading Mere Christianity there is yet another concept that applies to my life. This knowledge is only applicable as of late, but applicable nonetheless, “But feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling that you ought to help whether you want to or not. Supposing you hear a cry for help from a man in danger. You will probably feel two desires-one a desire to give help (due to your herd instinct), the other a desire to keep out of danger (due to the instinct for self-preservation). But you will find inside you, in addition to these two impulses, a third thing which tells you that you ought to follow the impulse to help, and suppress the impulse to run away. During the summertime, I experienced the exact situation of hearing a cry for help from a man in danger. The reactions to this event that Lewis depicts all rushed through my head whilst I attempted to figure out what I was to do. The impulse I felt to be most great was I felt if no one else steps up to do the right thing here, I will have let this man die. I held the life of this man in my hands, I was so nervous and I knew I could not choose impulse number two of self-preservation. There comes a certain point in every man’s life where he must no longer advocate for not only himself, but advocate for his comrade in need. Advocating for my own safety is exactly what I did on this day. In the simplest words possible, I am ashamed of my actions of choosing self-preservation and not taking the initiative for my fellow human being in saving his life. Once again, I let myself decide I would let someone else take responsibility rather than stepping up to the plate myself.
the world around us. For example, the way I see the world in my eyes will never be the same as someone else’s point of view.
In addition, I have always oddly felt as if my moral compass is heightened in a sense. I will never say I am better than another human being, however I do feel as if I am gifted with an ability of foresight. The thoughts Lewis conveys in Mere Christianity are not at all foreign to me, it is more as if I have had these conversations about morality before. Whilst reading Mere Christianity, there was an additional theory which stood out, “Now what interests me about all these remarks is that the man who makes them is not merely saying that the other man’s behaviour does not happen to please him. He is appealing to some kind of standard which he expects the other man to know about. And the other man very seldom replies: ‘To hell with your standard.’ Nearly always he tries to make out that what he has been doing does not really go against the standard, or that if it does there is some special excuse” (Lewis, 1952, p.1). Personally, there is a variety of ways for me to dissect this passage. However, I would like to speak on why this particular passage resonates with me. Within my own realm of interaction with other human beings, I tend to become upset rather quickly with them. This concept of creating your own moral standard and
philosophy oftentimes corrupts my relationships with others. As an athlete, and someone who is incredibly determined to do the right thing but also perform to the best of my God given ability, I am a cruel human being. The reason I portray myself as cruel is due to the fact of my personal moral standard being unreasonably high. While leaving myself with nearly zero margin for error in everything in life, it becomes easy to associate others within my extreme moral standard. The problem with that is, no one will ever understand the natural pressure of my standard. Therefore, nearly every human being I have shared genuine, intimate feelings with has let me down because I feel as if I do not relate to anyone in their own standard. Plenty of uncertainty has overcome me from feeling as if my standard is simply wrong. Whether I am justified or not to feel a certain way is beyond me, it only becomes difficult when I am told I am foolish for such a mentality. I understand the moral standard as well as the law of human nature. I believe God has created me to serve others and to operate as kind and gracious human being. My only issue is, it becomes increasingly difficult to show grace to others when I cannot do the same for myself. Coincidentally enough, throughout the duration of reading Mere Christianity there is yet another concept that applies to my life. This knowledge is only applicable as of late, but applicable nonetheless, “But feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling that you ought to help whether you want to or not. Supposing you hear a cry for help from a man in danger. You will probably feel two desires-one a desire to give help (due to your herd instinct), the other a desire to keep out of danger (due to the instinct for self-preservation). But you will find inside you, in addition to these two impulses, a third thing which tells you that you ought to follow the impulse to help, and suppress the impulse to run away. During the summertime, I experienced the exact situation of hearing a cry for help from a man in danger. The reactions to this event that Lewis depicts all rushed through my head whilst I attempted to figure out what I was to do. The impulse I felt to be most great was I felt if no one else steps up to do the right thing here, I will have let this man die. I held the life of this man in my hands, I was so nervous and I knew I could not choose impulse number two of self-preservation. There comes a certain point in every man’s life where he must no longer advocate for not only himself, but advocate for his comrade in need. Advocating for my own safety is exactly what I did on this day. In the simplest words possible, I am ashamed of my actions of choosing self-preservation and not taking the initiative for my fellow human being in saving his life. Once again, I let myself decide I would let someone else take responsibility rather than stepping up to the plate myself.