Some Objections | C. S. Lewis

An episode of the Reformed Thinking podcast, hosted by Edison Wu, titled "Some Objections | C. S. Lewis" was published on December 19, 2025 and runs 29 minutes.

December 19, 2025 ·29m · Reformed Thinking

0:00 / 0:00

Summary

Deep Dive into Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis - Some ObjectionsThe concept of the Moral Law, also referred to as the Law of Human Nature or the Rule of Decent Behaviour, faces two primary objections: that it is merely a complex instinct, such as the herd instinct, or that it is a social convention learned through education.The Moral Law cannot be reduced to instinct because instinct is defined as a strong want or desire to act in a certain way. While we may feel the desire to help someone (the herd instinct) and the desire to stay safe (self-preservation), the Moral Law is the third element that judges between these conflicting impulses, dictating which impulse ought to be followed. This governing principle cannot be one of the instincts it regulates. Like the sheet music that directs which notes on a piano should be played, the Moral Law provides the tune, while instincts are merely the keys. Furthermore, the law often demands that a person follow the weaker desire, or even actively try to stimulate an instinct, proving it is not itself the instinct. Importantly, no impulse is inherently good; whether an impulse like mother love or the fighting instinct is right or wrong depends entirely on whether the Moral Law tells us to encourage or suppress it in a given situation. Setting up any single impulse as an absolute guide is considered highly dangerous.Regarding the second objection, learning the Rule of Decent Behaviour from others does not automatically make it a human invention, just as learning the multiplication table does not make mathematics an arbitrary convention. Though moral ideas differ across times and places, a universal law is visible through these variations. Crucially, people believe in moral progress, asserting that some moralities are genuinely better or truer than others (e.g., preferring civilized morality over savage morality). This judgment requires measuring all systems against an independent, external standard—a "Real Morality." If the Moral Law were simply "whatever each nation approves," it would be impossible to speak coherently about moral improvement or to claim that any nation’s ideas were truer than another’s. This need for a standard confirms the Moral Law’s status as a real truth, not a changeable social convention. We must, however, distinguish moral disagreement from differences in belief about facts; for instance, ceasing to execute witches is an advance in factual knowledge, not necessarily a change in moral principle.Reformed Theologian GPT: https://chat.openai.com/g/g-XXwzX1gnv-reformed-theologianhttps://buymeacoffee.com/edi2730

Episode Description

Deep Dive into Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis - Some Objections

The concept of the Moral Law, also referred to as the Law of Human Nature or the Rule of Decent Behaviour, faces two primary objections: that it is merely a complex instinct, such as the herd instinct, or that it is a social convention learned through education.

The Moral Law cannot be reduced to instinct because instinct is defined as a strong want or desire to act in a certain way. While we may feel the desire to help someone (the herd instinct) and the desire to stay safe (self-preservation), the Moral Law is the third element that judges between these conflicting impulses, dictating which impulse ought to be followed. This governing principle cannot be one of the instincts it regulates. Like the sheet music that directs which notes on a piano should be played, the Moral Law provides the tune, while instincts are merely the keys. Furthermore, the law often demands that a person follow the weaker desire, or even actively try to stimulate an instinct, proving it is not itself the instinct. Importantly, no impulse is inherently good; whether an impulse like mother love or the fighting instinct is right or wrong depends entirely on whether the Moral Law tells us to encourage or suppress it in a given situation. Setting up any single impulse as an absolute guide is considered highly dangerous.

Regarding the second objection, learning the Rule of Decent Behaviour from others does not automatically make it a human invention, just as learning the multiplication table does not make mathematics an arbitrary convention. Though moral ideas differ across times and places, a universal law is visible through these variations. Crucially, people believe in moral progress, asserting that some moralities are genuinely better or truer than others (e.g., preferring civilized morality over savage morality). This judgment requires measuring all systems against an independent, external standard—a "Real Morality." If the Moral Law were simply "whatever each nation approves," it would be impossible to speak coherently about moral improvement or to claim that any nation’s ideas were truer than another’s. This need for a standard confirms the Moral Law’s status as a real truth, not a changeable social convention. We must, however, distinguish moral disagreement from differences in belief about facts; for instance, ceasing to execute witches is an advance in factual knowledge, not necessarily a change in moral principle.

Reformed Theologian GPT: https://chat.openai.com/g/g-XXwzX1gnv-reformed-theologian

https://buymeacoffee.com/edi2730