The Law of Human Nature
Chapter 1
Chapter 1
How is the Law of Human Nature different from other laws of nature? (3-4)
In the laws of nature, an object cannot choose to obey the law or not. In the law of human nature, a man can choose to obey or disobey.
What are some "herd instincts" that Lewis notes? (2)
Herd instincts include a mother's love, sexual instinct and instincts for food-they prompt us with impulses or desires.
In review, what are the "two odd things about the human race?" (1)
The first is that humans are haunted by the notion of some sort of behavior they ought to practice, the notion of fair play or decency or morality or Law of Nature. Second, humans do not practice or live up to this notion.
What is the first view people have had of what the universe is and how it came about. What does it embrace as true? (2)
The "Materialist View" states that matter and space happen to exist and always have existed. Matter behaves in certain fixed, unalterable ways. All of this came about by chance or by some fluke to produce us-creatures who are able to think!
What is the first point about putting the clock back? (2)
If a clock is wrong, you can turn it back. Sometimes the only way to progress forward if you've made a wrong turn is to go back.
Why in the past have people called this Rule about Right and Wrong the Law of Nature? (5)
Because they thought everyone knew it by nature-by who they were by human nature-and it was odd if someone did not know right from wrong.
How is the Moral Law perceived or felt differently than an instinct, desire, or impulse? (2)
One may say that breaking the Moral Law of Right and Wrong only points out that people are not perfect and ask why one would want to do that. How does Lewis respond? (1)
Lewis says he is not concerned at the present with blame, but rather with trying to find out the truth and if not conforming with the ought has any consequences.
What is the second view and what does it regard as true? (2)
The "Religious View" states that something like a "mind" is behind the universe, and it is conscious or aware and has purposes and preferences.
Regarding his second point about "religous jaw," where so far are we getting our knowledge? (3)
We are not getting our knowledge from churches or Bibles, but rather just from our own "steam" (i.e. experience and reason).
What is it we can learn from people disagreeing or quarreling? (1-2)
They are appealing to some kind of standard of behavior they expect the other person to know.
What example of a real truth (which exists whether or not it was ever taught) does Lewis cite? (6)
Mathematics
How does Lewis differentiate between the Laws of Nature as applied to stones or trees and the Law of Human Nature? (1-3)
Laws of Nature as applied to stones or trees are really only descriptions of what stones or trees actually do. Thus the Laws of Nature are just part of nature. But the Law of Human Nature does not describe what humans actually do, and therefore is not part of the machine of nature.
Some biased modern views often say that the best explainers of the universe today are no longer clergymen or philosophers but scientists. What exactly can scientists tell us? (2)
Science can tell us what they learn from external observations of the facts of nature or from the results of their experiments. They cannot answer anything about ultimate questions or the "why" behind the universe.
What two bits of evidence do we have available? (3)
The first bit of evidence is the universe around us, which is artistically beautiful but mercilessly cruel. The second bit is the "ought" within us, which won't indulge us, but is as hard as nails.
On what basis have some denied that the Law of (Human) Nature is known to all men? (6)
Some have said that different civilizations and different ages have had different notions of decent behavior and right and wrong.
Why can't there be one impulse which is always good that is actually the Moral Law? (4-5)
No one impulse or instinct is always good. A mother's love, patriotism, etc. can lead to unfairness and prejudice within families, communities, and nations. Following only one impulse of our nature at all cost can be dangerous and make us into devils.
Others might try to explain away the Law of Human Nature in terms of benefiting society or humanity as a whole. How does this fall short? (5)
One might ask, "Why ought I be unselfish?" The answer is "for society." Then one might ask, "Why should I care about society except if it benefits me?" The answer is "because you ought to be unselfish." In logic and debate this is called a "tautology" or simply saying the same thing over without ever giving a reason.
What other "one thing, and only one, in the whole universe [do] we know more about than what we could ever learn from external (scientific) observation?" How do we know it? (3)
What can we expect if the universe is governed by an absolute goodness? (3)
If the universe is governed by an absolute goodness, then we are also hopeless. We daily make ourselves an enemy of the goodness behind the "ought" or Law of Human Nature, because if we make one just mistake, we have failed; and it is unlikely that we will ever improve. Absolute goodness, then, is the supreme terror.
What two points does Lewis make at the end of the chapter? (11)
1. Human beings all over the earth have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way.
2. They do not in fact behave in that way.
What is Lewis's reply to the argument that Moral Law was responsible for witch burning in the past? (8)
Witch burning wasn't an error of moral law, but an error of fact. Witches do not, in fact, exist. But if they did, and they were torturing and killing people with special powers, then they ought to be stopped.
One might be tempted to try to explain away this oddity of the Law of Human Nature by saying it is really only some feature of the Laws of Nature that happens to be inconvenient or non-beneficial to oneself. Why is this not true?
Two different human acts can be equally inconvenient to oneself while being completely opposite in terms of "ought" or decent behavior. For example, getting a seat on a train: one man gets the seat first versus another man who moves my bag and slips into the seat while my back is turned. Both are inconvenient, but only one involves the "ought."
What is the third view about the universe and what does it put forward as true? (6)
The third view is the "Life Force Philosophy" or "Creative Evolution" or "Emergent Evolution." It says some kind of force is behind or outside the universe, but if the force is without purpose or presence, then it is merely the chance of the Material View. But if the force has preferences, then it is like a mind, which is the Religious View, with all its thrills but none of the consequences. (Mere wishful thinking)
Why did Lewis choose this round-about manner to get to his real subject of the book? (4)