S9E15: Abolition – Ch. 2, Pt. 2 (“Instincts and the Tao”)

Can we build a system of values based on Impulses?

 Click here to download audio for S9E15: “Instincts and the Tao”

Show Notes

Quote-of-the-Week

[The Innovator] is more likely to give up the quest for a ‘rational’ core and to hunt for some other ground even more ‘basic’ and ‘realistic’. This he will probably feel that he has found in Instinct… It looks… as if an ethics based on instinct will give the Innovator all he wants and nothing that he does not want.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

Introduction

Welcome friends to Pints With Jack! We are currently in the middle of “The Abolition of Man”. Last month we read through Chapter 1 (“Men Without Chests”) and last week we started Chapter 2 (“The Tao”) which we’ll wrap up next week!

Chit Chat

• Church is busy for Andrew, but he’s looking forward to some time with Diana Glyer, Matthew Clark, and of course, his lovely wife.
• David’s a little tired this morning from a very early trip to St. Louis for a baptism. He and his wife Marie are godparents to the daughter of Marie’s sister.
• Jordan from the Lesser-Known Lewis podcast sent David’s youngest a book. Thank you Jordan!
• Matt and his wife are in the parenthood home stretch! Just a few short weeks until baby Bush arrives. David offered some new parent tips, as an experienced veteran.

Toast

• Andrew drank Old Speckled Hen out of a PWJ glass.
• In honor of our Canadian friend Jordan, David had Moosehead.
• Matt had a glass of Athletic Brewing Company.

• Today we toast our new supporter, Sally Wilson. Cheers!

Discussion

Recap

Q. So what has been Lewis’ argument so far in The Abolition of Man?

• In Chapter 1, Lewis reveals how an English school textbook, which he calls “The Green Book”, teaches Logical Positivism. This is the philosophy which rejects all statements which are either not true by definition or which cannot be scientifically verified.
  • As a result, in the book pupils are taught how to debunk any sentiment, which Lewis says impoverishes the souls of the students.
  • Providing evidence from throughout world history, Lewis demonstrates the doctrine of objective value, the idea that objects can merit our approval or disapproval, and that an emotional reaction may be congruous or incongruous. He describes this doctrine using the Confusion term, “the Tao”.
• Jack considers the Latin proverb which speaks about dying for one’s country and notes that the authors of “The Green Book” would wish to debunk such a sentiment. However, how might they then inculcate the virtue of bravery in the face of danger and death?
• Lewis begins Chapter 2 claiming that any society which adopts the philosophy of “The Green Book” would destroy itself, but he doesn’t reject it on that account.
  • He points out that the very fact that “The Green Book” has been written shows that the authors are trying to shape society in a particular way, thus demonstrating that they’re not subjective about everything. 
    • Jack suggests that such people often hold, with complete uncritical dogmatism, a whole system of values which they believe to be immune from the debunking process.
  • Lewis considers how they might, after debunking traditional sentiments, establish and justify their own values. For this he returns to the question of dying for a good cause. How could it be justified and inculcated without the Tao?
    • Would utilitarianism be sufficient? No, because although it’s helpful to society for some to die so that the it may be preserved, on what basis would a particular person be galvanized to make such a sacrifice?
    • Could reason provide a basis for why one ought to die for a good cause? No, because you can’t get a conclusion in the imperative mood out of premisses in the indicative mood – you can’t get an “ought” from an “is”.
  • Lewis says that the only solution is either expand “Reason” to include “Practical Reason”, which is the Tao, or find an alternative source of value, namely Instinct, which we’ll explore today…
• Listeners who have read the chapter “some objections” in “Mere Christianity” might recognize themes from this chapter of TAOM.

01. “How can Instinct provide a value system?”

Q. Lewis suggests that after Reason has failed the Innovators, the next option they’ll choose is “Instinct”. Why?

• Instincts are inherent to all humans, and nobody needs to argue for them.

The preservation of society, and of the species itself, are ends that do not hang on the precarious thread of Reason: they are given by Instinct. That is why there is no need to argue against the man who does not acknowledge them. 

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

Q. What argument is made about instincts?

• The claim is that we have an instinctive urge to preserve the species and that’s why we ought to work for future generations. In contrast, it’s said that there’s no instinctive urge to keep your promises or respect individual life, so we can ignore these when they conflict with preserving the species. 
  • This seems like the sort of thing of which Weston from the Ransom trilogy would approve.
• However, this implies that we ourselves have a responsibility to carry this out, and generally, humans are great at giving an opinion, but wanting to pass the buck off to someone else.
• Instincts tell us – very loudly – what we want, and because of the strength of the urge, it’s tempting to accept them as truth.

02. “A sidebar on the sexual instinct”

Q. What does this mean for the sexual instinct?

• Nobody doubts the fact that we have a sexual urge, so the argument from the Innovators is that we should follow it as long as it doesn’t conflict with the preservation of the species. 
• Lewis makes the point that in previous generations, there were always taboos around sex, but they were always geared towards preserving the human species. However, contraception has meant that the sexual urge can be more freely indulged without the need of those taboos. 
  • The 1930 Anglican Lambeth Conference, narrow accommodations were made
  • In a couple of decades the hormonal birth control pill would be available on the NHS
• Jack wisely points out that removing the taboos and consequences for sex has inflamed the sexual instinct to the point where no one has self control anymore.
  • We’ll return to this subject in Chapter 3, and next season in “That Hideous Strength”

03. “What do Instincts actually give us?”

Q. Does Lewis think that instincts are a good foundation for real values?

• No. While one might define “instinct” as something which we just don’t understand (migratory birds find their way by instinct), Lewis defines “instinct” as “an unreflective or spontaneous impulse widely felt by the members of a given species.”
• There are also instances when we should follow an instinct, and instances where we should tamp down that same instinct. Instinct itself does not offer context for morality.
  • FYI, Lewis goes into this in a more accessible manner in Book I, Chapter 2 (“Some Objections”) of “Mere Christianity”.

Think…of a piano. It has not got two kinds of notes on it, the ‘right’ notes and the ‘wrong’ ones. Every single note is right at one time and wrong at another. The Moral Law is not any one instinct or set of instincts: it is something which makes a kind of tune (the tune we call goodness or right conduct) by directing the instincts.

C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (Some Objections)

• As Lewis points out, if we must follow instincts, why must we be exhorted and praised for follow instincts which is inevitable?
• Would we be happier if we always followed our instincts?
  • How does that work for Dulche et Decorum Est? We’ll never experience the happiness because we’ll be dead!

04. “Why ought we obey Instincts?”

Q. What’s the problem with saying we ought to obey instincts?

• If following instinct isn’t strictly necessary, and doesn’t make you happier in the end, is it that we ought to obey our instincts?
• What happens when our instincts conflict with one another?
  • There must be something other than instinct that influences which instinct to follow.
  • What if the thing that we ought to do is the weaker of the two impulses? This is especially problematic if our instincts have been inflamed.

Even if it were true that men had a spontaneous, unreflective impulse to sacrifice their own lives for the preservation of their fellows, it remains a quite separate question whether this is an impulse they should control or one they should indulge.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

Telling us to obey instinct is like telling us to obey ‘people’. People say different things: so do instincts. Our instincts are at war. If it is held that the instinct for preserving the species should always be obeyed at the expense of other instincts, whence do we derive this rule of precedence? 

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

• We can talk about the number of times we have impulses and the intensity of those feelings, but that doesn’t tell us whether we should indulge or curtail it.

Either the premisses already concealed an imperative or the conclusion remains merely in the indicative.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

05. “Do we have an Instinct to preserve the species?”

Q. What’s the final objection Lewis offers?

• Lewis asks whether or not there is even an instinct to preserve the species! 
  • He doesn’t think he has it and yet describes himself as a man who thinks a lot about the future.

Finally, it is worth inquiry whether there is any instinct to care for posterity or preserve the species. I do not discover it in myself: and yet I am a man rather prone to think of remote futurity—a man who can read Mr. Olaf Stapledon [a sci-fi writer] with delight. Much less do I find it easy to believe that the majority of people who have sat opposite me in buses or stood with me in queues feel an unreflective impulse to do anything at all about the species, or posterity. Only people educated in a particular way have ever had the idea ‘posterity’ before their minds at all. It is difficult to assign to instinct our attitude towards an object which exists only for reflective men.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

• This sort of thinking has to be nurtured by education, because it’s not rooted in us.
• Jack does believe we have an impulse to preserve our children and grandchildren, but this impulse generally doesn’t extend beyond those in our bloodline.

As we pass from mother love to rational planning for the future we are passing away from the realm of instinct into that of choice and reflection: and if instinct is the source of value, planning for the future ought to be less respectable and less obligatory than the baby language and cuddling of the fondest mother or the most fatuous nursery anecdotes of a doting father.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

• He uses the language of Plato’s Cave:

…and care for posterity the shadow—the huge, flickering shadow of the nursery happiness cast upon the screen of the unknown future. I do not say this projection is a bad thing: but then I do not believe that instinct is the ground of value judgements. What is absurd is to claim that your care for posterity finds its justification in instinct and then flout at every turn the only instinct on which it could be supposed to rest, tearing the child almost from the breast to cradle and kindergarten in the interests of progress and the coming race.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

06. “Where does that leave us?”

Q. According to Lewis, where does that leave us?

• Neither factual propositions nor appeals to instinct are sufficient as a basis for a system of values!
  • He quotes other sources: Confucius, Stoicism, Dante, Jesus, English philosopher John Locke…

All the practical principles behind the Innovator’s case for posterity, or society, or the species, are there from time immemorial in the Tao. But they are nowhere else.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

• Basically, the idea that we should care for man and future man stems from the Tao.
• The Tao is where we get the starting principles:

Unless you accept these without question as being to the world of action what axioms are to the world of theory, you can have no practical principles whatever. You cannot reach them as conclusions: they are premisses. 

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

• Any other attempt becomes a universal acid:

If nothing is self-evident, nothing can be proved. Similarly if nothing is obligatory for its own sake, nothing is obligatory at all.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

• We’re left with two options. You can either treat basic moral principles as sentiments, or rational axioms (Lewis’s preferred route).
  • You shouldn’t throw out an “ought” because it can’t produce an “is” as a credential.

07. “Stealing from the Tao”

Q. Lewis claims that those who attack the Tao are really just stealing from it. Why?

• They’re picking certain aspects while excluding others, in a sort of cafeteria morality.

All the values which he uses in attacking the Tao, and even claims to be substituting for it, are themselves derived from the Tao. If he had really started from scratch, from right outside the human tradition of value, no jugglery could have advanced him an inch towards the conception that a man should die for the community or work for posterity.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (The Tao)

• There needs to be a foundation to our morality, because we don’t start as a blank slate.

Wrap Up

Concluding Thoughts

The most dangerous thing you can do is to take any one impulse of your own nature and set it up as the thing you ought to follow at all costs. There is not one of them which will not make us into devils if we set it up as an absolute guide. You might think love of humanity in general was safe, but it is not. If you leave out justice you will find yourself breaking agreements and faking evidence in trials “for the sake of humanity,” and become in the end a cruel and treacherous man.

C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (Book 1, Chapter 2)

• “Mere Christianity” and “The Abolition of Man” work very well in concert together, as you’ve seen throughout this episode. One was written for a more general audience, while the other for a more academic group.

Support Us!

• Subscribe to the audio feed on your preferred podcast platform, such as iTunes, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Audible, and many others…
• Follow us on Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter
• See what we have planned for the rest of Season 9
• We would be grateful if new listeners would rate and review us on their preferred podcast platform.
• Finally, if you’d like to support us and get fantastic gifts such as access to our Pints With Jack Slack channel and branded pint glasses, please join us on Patreon for as little as $2 a month.