Essay: Virtue

This is yet another essay I have written for my philosophy class. It is based off of a quote from C.S. Lewis' The Abolition of Man.

~ ~ ~

C.S. Lewis once said, “No justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous.” There is a lot of weight to this single quote from Lewis’ essay, The Abolition of Man. For instance, what is virtue? Once that question has been answered, more arise. One such question is what Lewis means by a “justification of virtue.” And of course, what will enable a man to be virtuous? In order to even begin answering the last two of these three questions, one must naturally answer the first. For many people, the nature of virtue is ambiguous. For instance, many people would agree that murder is completely wrong, but that lying is fine on occasion. This is perhaps why there are such firm laws against murder, but slightly vague ones on lying, in the form of fraud. But when all is said and done, it is the choice of the man himself that allows him to be virtuous, whether laws governing morality are placed over him or not. Rules only serve as guidelines, not as concrete restrictions. But although whether or not a man is virtuous depends on the choice of the man himself, there are ways to instill virtue in him from a young age.

Virtue is not rational, insomuch as you cannot explain what drives a man to die for his country without acknowledging the existence of something outside of observable fact. The act of being virtuous, or morally good, is not something we come by naturally. Virtue is prompted by our conscience, God’s law of morality, which demands certain actions of us which are morally good. In truth, everyone knows what is morally good, even if they do not always listen to the still small voice that teaches them. In a sense, virtue has emotional as well as cognitive properties to it, since the heart recognizes what is beautiful, and the mind seeks to copy that beautiful deed or image. Going back to the example of a man who is willing to die for his country, Lewis says in The Abolition of Man that such a man would not do such a thing out of rationality. This is because a rational man would seek his own preservation. Although he could argue that he does so for the benefit of future generations, he has not observed them and cannot therefore say whether such a drastic action as his own death for his country would, in fact, benefit them. Instead, it is out of love that he does such a thing.

While virtue is not a rational concept, a man can attempt to point out what is good and bad using his mind. He can make lists of morally good and bad actions, but this does not make him virtuous. Such a man can be an excellent philosopher but still be a scoundrel if he does not follow his own advice. So much can be seen in the life of King Solomon, in the Bible, when he became the wisest man alive, but acted unwisely in following false gods, after he was commanded not to by God. Becoming virtuous is not just a cognitive action—one must integrate all the parts of man: the mind, the body, and the heart. The mind must listen to the heart when it tells him what is good, and the body must act appropriately on what the mind knows is good.

In order to fully integrate these parts of man to become virtuous, one should preferably begin learning and practicing virtue from a young age. If a man starts learning to become virtuous as an adult, he has already become so hardened in his ways that it is difficult for him to break his habits and follow the calling of virtue. One good way to actually learn virtue is to learn through example. Reading and hearing about virtue certainly teaches about the idea of virtue, but this only engages the mind. To engage the heart, selfless love from another is required to awaken the heart to the beauty of virtue. By learning through example, the child does not simply learn what virtue is, but also how it is to be acted upon. The child, or anyone who attempts to learn virtue, should also saturate themselves in the goodness, the truth, and the beauty of God’s Word, and also in manmade art. After a while, such exposure to morally good stories and images begins to rub off on the learner.

Overall, hearing about and knowing the concept of virtue is not enough to be virtuous, just as C.S. Lewis stated. But knowing the concept is at least a start, since you can still build off of that idea and choose to live in a world filled with good, so that you may learn to be good yourself. Even if it does come down to a person’s choice as to whether or not they will not only know good, but also do good, the person must have first somehow learned not only what is good, but what good looks like in action. We learn best through imitation, which is certainly applicable to learning virtue. We are called to be a light to this dark world so that others who are lost can learn virtue through our good examples.

Question 4: Good and Evil

What is the nature of good and evil?

At first glance, you might think you can answer this question. You might say that obviously, murder is evil. But there is really a lot more depth to this question. For example, why is murder evil? That's what the question is really asking. It's not asking what actions are good and what actions are evil, but what it is about these actions that makes them one or the other.

I've had several thoughts on this, but I know I don't have the answer quite yet. So I'm answering this question today not so I can give you the one correct answer, but to show you where I'm at in my own thinking. And honestly, this applies to the rest of my posts, too. You can choose whether or not you want to believe me -- I'm just showing you where I'm at in the hope that it may somehow help you.

A book that I read recently made me want to try answering this today. I first started thinking more deeply about this three years ago when I first read Confessions, by St. Augustine. But the book I read recently that prompted this question for my blog was The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, by Robert Louis Stevenson. In this story, Dr. Jekyll makes himself a potion that will transform him into a being of pure evil, namely, Mr. Hyde. In order to change back to the form of Jekyll, he must drink the potion again. One twist I found interesting, though, and one which I think many people who have not read the story do not realize, is that although Hyde represents pure evil, Jekyll does not represent pure good. Jekyll does have good in him, unlike Hyde, but it seemed that when he transformed into Hyde, he basically lost whatever good he had temporarily. As the story progresses, it becomes more difficult for Hyde to transform back into Jekyll, until eventually he is stuck as Hyde.

One reason I have trouble explaining the idea of good and evil is that if you say that both good and evil exist, where did they come from? Based on Genesis we know that God created everything and saw that it was good. But then sin and evil entered the garden when Eve was tempted, and she and her husband ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But did God create evil along with good? Because if He did, then there must have been evil in Him, as well, for it to have come from Him. But this is completely contradictory to God's nature. If God were evil He would not be God. So since God could not have created evil, how then did it come about? I would have to say that evil is a perversion of the good that God created. Take the sin of gluttony, for example. We were given good things to be enjoyed so that we praise God for them, but a consumption of good things to the point where your focus is on the object and not on God makes the desire for the thing evil.

Now back to Jekyll and Hyde. Jekyll said in the story that his motive for creating his potion was that he could not stand living with two warring sides existing within him: one desiring good, and one desiring evil. Thus, he wanted to separate the two so that they could more fully exercise their desires. Instead, his potion fed the evil within him and made it stronger. What I do not agree with here is his belief that evil is somehow equal with good and that it should be allowed to thrive along with good. I would say that although sin is powerful in its hold over our hearts, God's grace has conquered it so that it does not have the same sway over us as Christians. Of course we are still tempted, but with God in us, we are made able to become more like Christ. Ultimately, although evil is strong, God's goodness is infinitely stronger.

What I do agree with, and what I think should be a warning to us all, is that as tempting as it may be to give in to evil, doing so only allows the evil more power over us. Giving in to evil does not do away with evil, as much as we might want it to. The only way to be rid of it is to accept God and grow more like Him--to fill ourselves with good.

Essay: Peeling the Onion

My post for this week has been adapted from an essay I wrote in my philosophy class this year. While this essay seems clear enough to me to understand without having read either That Hideous Strength (the last book of C.S. Lewis' Space Trilogy) or The Inner Ring, I would highly recommend reading both.

- - -

A common issue faced by believers and unbelievers alike is that of peer pressure. Usually peer pressure becomes a problem for believers when a person’s peers try to convince the person to do something sinful. However, even for unbelievers peer pressure is an issue when the action in question involves taking drugs, drinking alcohol, or other unlawful deeds. While unbelievers may not accept sin as a valid reason for avoiding peer pressure, they do often accept breaking the law as a good reason. C.S. Lewis did an excellent job covering the idea of peer pressure in his paper titled The Inner Ring. He also applies the same ideas he discusses in The Inner Ring to his novel, That Hideous Strength, in the shape of his character Mark Studdock. His representation of peer pressure in the form of Studdock not only reveals the danger of the Inner Ring, but also what it takes to remove oneself from the temptation of it.

According to Lewis, Inner Rings exist in almost every part of life, especially in universities. He represents the main concept of the Inner Ring as an onion which a person continues to peel the layers off of. Eventually, all the layers will be peeled back and nothing will remain. The closer you get to the center of the onion, the less the onion is valued. Lewis also says that the Inner Ring is not necessarily evil, but that it is unavoidable. For instance, friendships formed between coworkers are not evil, but are in fact good. The idea of the Inner Ring can lead to evil, though. When the members of the Inner Ring follow a certain practice, anyone who doesn’t follow that practice immediately becomes an outsider. So if the Inner Ring became sinful, virtuous people would be outsiders, and anyone trying to be an insider would necessarily become a scoundrel. Overall, the main idea behind the Inner Ring is that of belonging to something or someone. This is because all humanity is made to want to belong, since we all belong to God.

Mark Studdock, in Lewis’ novel, That Hideous Strength, lived by this idea of belonging. In the beginning of this story his wife Jane was, in Studdock’s mind, only a part of this plan as a trophy. He did not value her for herself, but for what she might bring him in his attempt to belong to the Inner Ring. Studdock wanted to be viewed as one of the academic elite by becoming important in Bracton College. As Studdock progressed further into the Inner Ring, he rarely agreed with the ideas and methods of his colleagues, but he followed along with them so that he would not lose his job. Even though there was a darker purpose behind what the N.I.C.E. (one of the Inner Rings Studdock found his way into) did, Studdock mainly chose to ignore it and to simply belong. He was pulled into evil actions and purposes merely by his instincts.

When Studdock finally came to realize the evil he had become a part of, he was disgusted and rebelled against his captors. Even before this point, Studdock had found very little to like about his new colleagues in the Inner Ring. He was repelled by Fairy Hardcastle, annoyed by Withers, and terrified of The Head. Studdock was also frustrated upon first entering the N.I.C.E. because he was not allowed to follow his career. When Studdock was taken captive by Frost, who tried to eradicate Studdock’s instincts, Studdock came to hate Frost and merely pretended to go along with his ideas. In the end, after Studdock had seen the truth behind the Inner Ring and was disillusioned by it, he escaped with the aid of Mr. Bultitude and Merlin.

The help Studdock required in escaping the Inner Ring provides an interesting illustration of how we cannot escape the power of the Inner Ring without help, as well. Our help, however, comes from God. But in order to escape, we also must want to leave. We must first break the power of the Inner Ring by understanding how pointless it is, and by going on with our proper work. When we have done this, we become what Lewis calls “sound craftsmen,” people who do what they are meant to do with their professions. Lewis also calls this group of sound craftsmen an Inner Ring of its own—one full of worthwhile people and worthwhile work. This is what Studdock truly wanted all along, but never found in the N.I.C.E. We too, in order to avoid falling into the same trap as Studdock, must find our Inner Rings of sound craftsmen to fill our lives with truth and goodness.

Question 3: Our Identities

Do our abilities and accomplishments define our identities?

The reason I want to answer this question in particular is that I find it so relevant to where we are today. The American mindset is currently to get a good job, have a family with the average two-and-a-half children, and retire with a large fortune. Right now, I want to show to the best of my ability how this idea is faulty.

From a young age, children are constantly asked what they want to grow up to be. Some want to be firemen, some want to be doctors, but they all have some dream of becoming a famous hero of the human race. This on its own is not necessarily bad, but as the child matures and reaches high school, their dreams often fade away under the quest of deciding on a well-paying career. This idea carries the student through college, all the way to adulthood, and even though at that point such a person has already found a career, their goal in life remains the same: make a fortune, live in paradise, and die with the most fame.

Of course, very few Americans ever actually reach this status. They try and try again, but often encounter setbacks. But even if they don't, and they eventually reach their goal, they will end up making yet another, more difficult goal for themselves. This kind of person is never satisfied with what they actually have, since riches are worth nothing in the end, when everyone must eventually die and leave behind all his or her accomplishments. When people deny that something exists beyond death--beyond humanity--their main recourse is this mindset.

Christianity presents an idea vastly different to this, and much more hopeful. Essentially, we have our identity in Christ, not in our own abilities. Christianity acknowledges that we are all given unique abilities, but these also pass away like a puff of smoke as soon as we die. So it is not our abilities which shape us, but rather what shapes us is what we choose (or choose not) to do with them. Our choices can take us in one of two directions: towards becoming more Christ-like, or becoming less human.

What do I mean by becoming more Christ-like? I mean, simply, that we should love others as Christ loved us. After all, the golden rule is to love others as you love yourself. And how do you love yourself? To take a page from C.S. Lewis' book, Mere Christianity, we do not love ourselves by always thinking good things about ourselves. The way we love ourselves is by always wanting good for ourselves. Therefore, we should always want good for others, whether we think good things about them or not. So in a way, our actions shape our identities, because we have to respond in some way to Christ's love for us. If we accept it and act towards becoming more like Christ, that takes us in one direction. But if we reject it and try to forge our own path to greatness, we don't have a strong goal and are merely stuck in our own desires, which in the end make us more animal than human.

This latter option is what Americans today seem to have chosen. Instead of choosing to want good for others, they merely want good for themselves, and get so caught up in this that they lose sight of the big picture and only find out their fault too late. Without Christ, we have no hope of anything after death, and are stuck in the pain and despair of the present. "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away" (Revelation 21:4). In the end, all of the horrible things we know in this life will be obliterated, and we will be with God in eternal glory.