In making the argument for the existence of the Law of Human Nature, C.S. Lewis first establishes the acknowledgement of a few different universal laws that man in subjected to. There is the law of gravity, in which Lewis insinuates that in the eyes of gravity, the body of man and a mere stone are one and the same. Then there are biological laws that correspond with those than an animal has. However, the one law that is specific to man and that man is free to disobey or get “mistaken”, is the “Law of Nature or decent behavior” (Lewis). C.S. Lewis uses inductive reasoning to form this kind of logic by first making the observation that even though throughout time man has seemed to have had different agreements of what they believe to be moral, …show more content…
Lewis proved he was not one for hesitation when it came to voicing his theories about the universe. Carefully manufacturing his first theory with inductive reasoning, Lewis is sure to incorporate logical thinking in his argument for the Law of Human Nature by pointing out different pieces of evidence to larger, more universal statements. He makes general observations after comparisons with different universal laws as well as different civilizations throughout time. Following these remarks, he delves further into his theory that people don’t need to be taught the Law of Nature, but that almost everyone knows it by nature. In the second paragraph, Lewis further establishes logical persuasion by pointing out his “Power Behind” theory with deductive reasoning. He goes from general thinking and indicates that there can be two different views on how the universe came to be, then he goes further into specifics by providing examples and evidence of how there really is a higher power, or a “Power Behind” (Lewis). In the end, I believe the more effective approach to stating one’s theory with logic would have to be with deductive reasoning. With deduction, one can make a broad observation before going into specifics and providing evidence to make the generalization more precise and restricted. Therefore, when Lewis made his argument with deductive reasoning, he was able to convince the audience with a more advantageous
Undaunted Courage by Steven Ambrose is written about the exploration of the West by Meriwether Lewis and William Clark. Thomas Jefferson, president of the United States, decided to send Lewis on this exploration, and Lewis chose to take Clark along with him. Many people criticized Jefferson because westward expansion had been tried before and failed. Others argued that he shouldn’t be allowed to purchase land with their tax dollars. Ambrose argues that Jefferson made the correct decision in choosing Lewis to explore the land that makes up Louisiana, Arkansas, parts of northeastern Texas, Oklahoma, eastern Colorado, and Minnesota (Kindle Locations 92-93).
Reginald F. Lewis was an African-American lawyer, businessman, author, and philanthropist. Lewis was a larger than life figure in the business world. His intelligence, determination, and tenacity to all his endeavors and set a standard for excellence that endures to this day. His life story brought him to the city of Baltimore, to the highest reaches of finance in Wall Street. When he passed away at the age of 50 from brain cancer in 1993, Forbes magazine put him on its list of the wealthiest Americans with a net worth of about $400 million.
“A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line” (Lewis 38). In his time as an atheist, Lewis continued trying to prove that God did not exist by discussing the wrong in the world. He soon realized that he actually proved that God indeed does exist. If the world truly held no meaning, man would not be able to discover that it had no meaning. If no light existed in the universe and there were no creatures with eyes, man would never know that dark existed.
In C.S. Lewis’, Mere Christianity he goes into depth about the concept of Universal Moral Law and what it truly means as he presents his thoughts in his rhetorical argument. C.S. Lewis seems to captivate a reader's thoughts by expressing that there is a Universal Moral Law. In addition, if there is a moral law-giver, then there must be something greater in the universe. All together, C.S. Lewis concludes that through this, there must be something beyond the universe itself. Lewis states that,“human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it.
I think this quote means no one is by themselves, there are others that are just like you. I think C.S Lewis is trying to say that you don’t have to be alone and pretend that some experiences only happen to you. Bad and good experiences happen to everyone that can relate to you. This quote means we can read with the confidence that there are others out there who have had the same indescribable feelings that you have. Other people also have read that book and they go through the same experiences and feelings for that book as you.
Title: Defend the Argument from Evil Name: Jun Hao Li Word Count: 1394 Prompt you are responding to: Prompt (3) Defend the Argument from Evil Intro: Since ancient time, people have used the abundance of evil and suffering within our world to challenge the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and all good God. The argument being that is such a God exists, he would be able and willing to exterminate evil. Seeing that evil still exists, supporters of the Argument from Evil have concluded that an omnipotent, omniscient, and all good God does not exist.
Meriwether Lewis was an American explorer, the governor of Louisiana, and a leader of the Lewis & Clark expedition of which he traveled throughout the new Louisiana territory to discover more about this land and achieve goals for the new land. He was traveling to D.C. to deliver “Jefferson classified information.” But, it ended up that on this trip, Meriwether Lewis had died. Meriwether Lewis was murdered by conspiracy. Let’s start with the physical evidence.
In Louis Pojman’s “Argument Against Moral Relativism”, he classifies the three premises for ethical relativism. Those of which include the diversity thesis, the dependency thesis and the final result of ethical relativism. Following his explanation of these three ideals, he goes onto explain as to why each one of them are invalid. Of the arguments that he provided, I’d consider his justification against the concept of subjectivism.
The teleological argument, or otherwise known as the argument from design and the intelligent design argument, is a philosophical theory put forward by William Paley with its final premise of proving that god exists. The argument includes a handful of elements, however close to the fringe yet within the margin, of logic in order to assist the facilitation of accepting the premise as a truth. As we examine the argument, and its implications in the context in which it was given, we can begin to see the boundary of logic become veiled and intuition and assumptions start to interpose. The teleological argument is most commonly started with a supposition parable dealing with a watch, so lets start out with that. Suppose you are walking down along a river and along the way you spot something in the dirt.
The Abolition of Man The main argument of “The Abolition of Man” is the idea of natural law and subjectiveness. C. S. Lewis believed that the western world was falling down a path to the destruction of natural law and objective rights and wrongs. He believed that if the western world continued to follow down that path, it would be the destruction of itself. Whether or not that is still happening today is another topic to discuss. C. S. Lewis saw that the belief of subjectivism was being incorporated into the educational system.
Dr. Mortenson taught his audience on the subject of how the idea that the earth is billions of years old became such an accepted belief, and is almost unquestioned by the current generation. Using Processional organization, he presented his speech through the years of different atheists and deists such as Jean Lamarck, and Pierre Laplace, as well as through the eyes of “liberal theologians” such as Thomas Chalmers, and George Stanley. Dr. Mortenson showed his audience through means of informative speech, how we should understand that the prevailing belief the world is billions of years old, did not happen overnight. Through his approach to the audience, his organizational process, and his informative strategy, Dr. Mortenson could effectively or inefficiently captivate and inform his audience or confuse them further on the subject. Dr. Mortenson kept eye contact with his audience almost the entire time he spoke, only looking down briefly to read notes.
The Abolition of Man, by CS Lewis, is a book that describes the ideas of how power is used over the units by humanity. CS Lewis idea might become truth, and we, as humans, should put more attention to this idea. The book contained three parts; the three different parts show the importance of ethics and the absolute harmony with natural order in the universe. In the first paragraph of The Abolition of Man, men without chests, Lewis describes how different books show that schoolboys do not need to express their emotions.
Descartes and Hume. Rationalism and empiricism. Two of the most iconic philosophers who are both credited with polarizing theories, both claiming they knew the answer to the origin of knowledge and the way people comprehend knowledge. Yet, despite the many differences that conflict each other’s ideologies, they’re strikingly similar as well. In this essay I will attempt to find an understanding of both rationalism and empiricism, show the ideologies of both philosophers all whilst evaluating why one is more theory is potentially true than the other.
This is a demonstration of intrinsic faith, which Sigmund Freud and C.S Lewis exemplify. Sigmund Freud and C.S Lewis are famous theologians who’s writings share a common parallelism, but disagree on whether or not there is a God. Lewis stands behind the spiritual worldview
St. Anselm and Descartes are known for presenting the first ontological arguments on the existence of God. The word ontological is a compound word derived from ‘ont’ which means exists or being and ‘–ology’ which means the study of. Even though Anselm and Descartes’ arguments differ slightly, they both stem from the same reasoning. Unlike the other two arguments on God’s existence (teleological and cosmological), the ontological argument does not seek to use any empirical evidence but rather concentrates on pure reason. The rationale behind this school of thought